On 2014-02-26 05:50, Brad Roberts wrote:
The 'build' part of the auto-tester is the easiest part. The majority
of the logic is in what to build when and the user interface on top of
that state. None of that exists for this use case. It's not hard
logic, but it would need to be built.
This use case can likely also ignore the multi-platform part and stick
to just building on one which simplifies the job significantly. And it
can also likely all be done on one box since it's likely that it can all
be done in a relatively short period of time.
All that, in my mind, suggests that while it could be integrated into
the auto-tester, it gains little in doing so and puts more work on my
plate and more load on already loaded systems. I think having a new
volunteer involved would be more long term beneficial.
How much worked would it be to rewrite the auto tester to not use the
proprietary systems it currently does? I'm thinking this would make it
easier for others to help.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
