> This is a great idea! > Real continues integration requires automated regressions tests and > that is probably a bridge to far. But in most cases of jallib, we can > be pretty sure that a change in a lib is okay when it is tested on one > relevant PIC and it compiles with all relevant tests and samples.
One first, important, must-have step is: if it does not compile, there is a problem (and there are...). This is far easy to do this, and would save us time. I'll setup a script on my server, which will build jallib's sample from scratch (svn checkout) every night, and post a mail on this list. About regression tests, maybe we can do it in silico. Not PIC's silico, but PC's. A long time (posts) ago, I was talking about using PICShell unit testing capabilities. I know Olivier (PICshell's author) is on this list, but I'm not sure he reads all our incredibly interesting posts :) That may be a "track" to follow. If we're able to test small things (one test, one function), then it could be interesting to put this on a buildbot, so we can track precisely what's going on. Seb -- Sébastien LELONG http://www.sirloon.net http://sirbot.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
