Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
Are you aware of http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/ ?
Yes. And it does not seem to be open for all
Ah, ok. It indeed isn't open for anonymous participation; the test results are open for all, though.
We are not just talking about buildbots here (which the links you refer to seem to be); we are talking about buildbots that don't test Python, but test Python applications.
Then I would dare to say you haven't fully investigated the links fully, Bitten, for example, also runs the unit-tests for any target you configure
I don't understand that comment. Bitten seems to be a software package, similar to buildbot. It doesn't do anything useful until I install and configure it, unlike, say, SourceForge, which is not (just) a soft package, but a running installation of it also. Right?
The effort is in installing and configuring it, given that many such packages are already written. Distributed testing frameworks typically support running arbitrary target comments, so Bitten is not really special here (buildbot can also run about anything if you configure it to).
We do know how to run a buildbot.
How relevant was this comment in the entire? I am merely trying to help out here pointing out other similar projects when the community participating building issue was raised.
It would have been helpful if you had stated *why* you think these URLs are relevant in the context of the discussion. To me, it seemed you are pointing to the existence of distributed testing frameworks. I was pointing out that we (at least, I) am aware of the existence of such frameworks, and that we were doing it for quite some time now also, just like Pike.