Vijay Kiran Kamuju <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ok I was expressing my concern as it took around 2-3hrs to see my > patch in the patchwatcher.
It's running on a 1GHz single core machine right now. I'll probably put it on something rather faster. > Also as you you running the wine tests all for each patch are you > cleaning the .wine directory ( I am bit confused here) No. Probably should, but I'm not. > It would better if we have a parallelized version of the tests also > run on a fast m/c. I do have a patch that enables parallel execution of conformance tests, I hope Alexandre accepts it. That will help on multicore systems. Beyond that, I could fairly easily use multiple machines, e.g. assign all patches to machines based on md5sum. > Also can you improve the messages. Yes. I already changed the success message to make more sense, and added background colors of green and red for success and failure. > If there are errors, Its possible to only show the test data that > failed rather than the complete test run. Yes. > Also put it in a public repository with you as sole commiter. Already there, see http://code.google.com/p/winezeug/ > So If we have any suggestions/improvements, can mail you with the > changes (We will not flood ur mail box ;) ) Please do. - Dan