Re: Rietveld patchy: test run

[David Kastrup]

Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:

> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 03:14:38PM +0100, Julien Rioux wrote:
>> Could someone familiar with patchy please locally replace their
>> compile_lilypond_test.py file with the attached one and test it
>> against the patches that are currently lining up for testing?
>
> To avoid leaving you hanging:
> - I am familiar with this, but I have no time for testing it.
>   Sorry.
> - David is reasonably familiar with patchy test-new, but he's
>   using an old laptop, which makes all this compiling rather
>   a pain (especially on the HD).

Oh, the laptop where the HD was a real pain was from 2000.  I have been
able to get one from 2007 recently due to a generous donation by another
developer.  This one takes only about 1.7 hours for a full staging test
rather than the 5+ hours of the old one.

I _am_ somewhat jealous that Phil tends to bump master to staging about
20 minutes after pushing to staging.  But it is not all that bad.  When
I test patches, it only takes about 40 minutes before I get the first
result.

> It doesn't help that he also does a ton of programming.

The programming is not impacted all that much.  Except when I need to
test things.  I tend to do only cursory tests, and then upload to
Rietveld.  That way I can test during the next test-patches run.

> I am a bit disappointed that nobody has gotten familiar with
> patchy's test-new, especially considering David's limited
> computation power... but that's just how things are.

Maybe they'll get better.  It would appear that Julien's work takes
patchy closer to the realm where the results are reliable without
thinking too much.

-- 
David Kastrup