Ben Liblit wrote:
Jim Cornette wrote:
Is this similar to what the Fedora Automated Test Suite [...] aims to
accomplish?
Both share the goal of making software suck less. :-) The key
difference is that the Fedora Automated Test Suite uses an explicit,
fixed, human-designed battery of tests. CBI treats regular daily usage
as the "test suite", where any run that ends in failure (e.g. crash) is
taken as an example of a failed test.
These are complementary approaches, of course. A well-designed
automated test suite is extremely valuable but can be hard to create.
CBI offers a different view of things, with less developer steering and
more focus on ordinary day-to-day usage.
Thanks for explaining the difference between the two approaches.
Jim
--
Of course I use Microsoft. Setting up a stable Unix network is no
challenge.
-- From a Slashdot.org post
