On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 10:44:59PM -0500, Ken Williams wrote:
> The reason is that I generally just submit test results blindly, without
> checking whether someone else has already reported a particular
> package/version/platform combination. This works okay for me because I
> seem to be the only one reporting tests for the Darwin platform, but it
> would be nice to be assured that I'm not reporting redundant data.
While its good to be aware of what has passed and what has failed,
redundant test data is good. Just because someone reports, for
example, "ok 5.6.1 Linux/x86" it doesn't mean it will work across
*all* versions and configurations of Linux x86. Especially when XS
enters the scene. It also can add more debugging information should
it pass on one guy's setup and fail on another.
So while we don't currently record these little environmental
differences, it still adds confidence to have ten pass reports from
ten different testers than only one. The cpan-tester's database
should be able to sift and collate this data and present it in a
non-redundant manner.
PS Is the CC too wide?
--
Michael G. Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/
Perl6 Quality Assurance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kwalitee Is Job One
<GuRuThuG> make a channel called #Perl, and infest it with joking and
fun.... it doesnt make alot of sense.
