Rene Rivera wrote: > Count me in that "us" ;-\
<g> > Don't know if different people ran it or not. But it is simply that one has > a different file name, from an old run, and the table is sorted strictly on > the file name of the results. If the old run is no longer relevent (as run date October 17 suggests) who would be responsible for removing it? > I've been trying to figure out a good way to show that some test are newer > than others, because sorting by date is not possible, and I like that > suggestion very much :-] I'd prefer a bit more granularity than you suggest > though. How'bout this: > > GREEN -- tests ran in the last 48 hours. > YELLOW -- tests ran in the last 7 days. > RED -- tests ran in the last 14 days. > BLACK -- tests are older than 14 days. I tend to like default (black) text to indicate there is no error, and only colour-code things that need attention. In your scheme it is the reverse, black being an 'abandoned' test suite. I'll leave it to the regression-reporters to work out the right granularity though, it's easy to be the touch-line quarterback on these issues ;¬ ) -- AlisdairM _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
