Re: Re: required/DEV300 CWS sb118 : cwscheckapi replaced with subsequenttests

On 03/01/10 14:38, Bernd Eilers wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>> [... snip ....]
>> @Bernd:  Note that this will render the CWSCheckAPI entries on a CWS
>> EIS page meaningless.  Unlike cwscheckapi, subsequenttests does not
>> report any status to EIS.
> 
> I can mark the CWSCheckAPITest as unavailable in the EIS Database so it 
> will only be shown on those CWS where a status has actually been 
> reported in the past. I think I should do this.

Not sure how best to do the transition.  In principle, CWSs other than 
sb118 that are based on code versions where sb118 has not been 
integrated should offer CWSCheckAPI tests, while others should not.

> May I ask why subsequenttests does not report it´s status to EIS? Is 
> this a political or technical issue? Or is it just a currently missing 
> feature which is planned to be added?

The intention is that those tests are run as one step of any ordinary 
build, including buildbot/tinderbox builds.  That way, the 
buildbot/tinderbox status information in a CWS's EIS page will already 
give the relevant information.

-Stephan