On 01/09/08 at 10:20 +0200, Gonéri Le Bouder wrote: > On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 09:22:40AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > On 30/08/08 at 17:43 +0200, Gonéri Le Bouder wrote: > > > On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 02:00:06PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote: > > > > On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 07:28:45 -0300, Martín Ferrari wrote: > (...) > > > I think that you are both missing the point. > > > > PET and buildstat are competitors, because they both try to: > > - run tests > > - display information in an useful way > > > > As a result, it's likely that none of them will succeed, and that we > > will have to live with several tools doing basically the same thing for > > years, like lintian and linda. > We are both willing to merge our tools. buildstat works today and is > already able to accept QA resultat from a standardized format. I think > a meeting is absolutly needed here with the three parties. > IMO Buildstat is a DB + an interface to collect QA check results from 3th > parties tools. > Creating such schema wasn't that easy, I had to recreate it from scratch > two times yet. > > (...) > > UDD isn't the ultimate solution, but it at least forces a clean > > workflow: > For me, the best solution to get a working solution quickly is to act > like that. It's not what most of you want. I guess you wish to see > buildstat out of the scheam, but it works fine. > > > Test1 Test2 Test3 Test4 > > \ \ / / > > `---------\ \ / /-----' > buildstat (input interface) > buildstat(DB) <------> U D D > > | | | > > | DDPO-like web interface | > > | ` DDPO-by-mail | > | PET interface | > | buildstat interface | > > | ` other scripts | > > Of course, I share the final goal of having a Ultimate Database but > stopping what works fine today is not a good option for me. > > If we do a meeting we Buildstat, PET and UDD teams, we will able to > quickly prepare a clean roadmap and, more important, avoid futur wast of > time. I'm not sure that waiting for a meeting is a good idea. Tincho is in argentina, and I'll have problems freeing some time in the near future to attend a meeting, etc. I would prefer if we start by discussing this by mail. Could we use pet-devel@ for that? And ask all interested parties to subscribe? -- | Lucas Nussbaum | lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature