Michael,
You might want to look at some of the work on the Pugs test suite.
http://m19s28.vlinux.de/cgi-bin/pugs-smokeserv.pl
It uses (among other things) Test::TAP::Model and
Test::TAP::HTMLMatrix, and uses YAML as an intermediate test-run format.
Stevan
On Nov 22, 2005, at 2:11 PM, Michael Peters wrote:
Hello all,
I'm in the planning stages for a project (brief planning notes
http://examples.petersfamily.org/smolder.html if interested) that
will be used
to collect test reports for project and make them viewable on the web.
I want to change as little about the way they run their tests, but
still be able
to collect all of the needed data. I thought about using prove with
--verbose,
and have the users pipe that into a file. But it's not quite TAP
since it
changes the plan line and outputs aggregate results at the end.
My other idea was to create an XML version of TAP (probably as a
micro-format
(http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2005/03/23/deviant.html,http://
www.microformats.org/)
so that it's still viewable in a browser. TAML? While I want to
avoid creating
yet-another-xml-language, XML seems like a good solution for
sharing and storing
smoke test results.
Another reason to use something wrapped around TAP would be to
collect other
information that TAP does not provide, like platform, date and time
run, time to
completely run, and if applicable developer name.
Does any of this seem reasonable? Overkill? Already done?
Thanks,
--
Michael Peters
Developer
Plus Three, LP
