Code Sprint Results

[Rik-4]

July 16th, 2011

Wow!  We began somewhat slowly--this was our first sprint ever after
all--but really picked up speed.  By the end we were checking in something
every few minutes.  Along the way we also found some interesting errors in
quadl() and the implementation of permutation matrices.  In total, 106
files were taken care of.  Excellent.

--Rik
_______________________________________________
Help-octave mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.cae.wisc.edu/listinfo/help-octave

[Sergei Steshenko]

--- On Sat, 7/16/11, Rik <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From: Rik <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Code Sprint Results
> To: "Octave Maintainers" <[hidden email]>, [hidden email]
> Date: Saturday, July 16, 2011, 6:29 PM
> July 16th, 2011
>
> Wow!  We began somewhat slowly--this was our first
> sprint ever after
> all--but really picked up speed.  By the end we were
> checking in something
> every few minutes.  Along the way we also found some
> interesting errors in
> quadl() and the implementation of permutation
> matrices.  In total, 106
> files were taken care of.  Excellent.
>
> --Rik
> _______________________________________________
> Help-octave mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mailman.cae.wisc.edu/listinfo/help-octave
>

Thanks for the update.

In what release of Octave and/or its forge are we going to see the bug
fixes and what is the tentative date for the release(s) ?

Thanks,
  Sergei.

_______________________________________________
Help-octave mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.cae.wisc.edu/listinfo/help-octave

[Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso-2]

On 16 July 2011 23:23, Sergei Steshenko <[hidden email]> wrote:
> In what release of Octave and/or its forge are we going to see the
> bug fixes and what is the tentative date for the release(s) ?

We haven't started thinking of a 3.6 release date yet, but we might
have a 3.4.3 bugfix release soon, in a few months. There were only a
few bugfixes during the code sprint; it was mostly about writing tests
and socialising in chat. Except for one mistaken commit, the commits
were all on the default development branch, so they won't be seen
until 3.6 (they're mostly of developer interest anyways, since end
users don't generally run the test suite).

- Jordi G.H.
_______________________________________________
Help-octave mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.cae.wisc.edu/listinfo/help-octave

[Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso-2]

On 16 July 2011 20:29, Rik <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Wow!  We began somewhat slowly--this was our first sprint ever after
> all--but really picked up speed.  By the end we were checking in
> something every few minutes.  Along the way we also found some
> interesting errors in quadl() and the implementation of permutation
> matrices.  In total, 106 files were taken care of.  Excellent.

The code sprint by numbers:

Changesets committed: 68

Files touched  (including renames): 144

Tests written (including plot demos): 447

People who committed csets: 8

First-time committers: 4

Time spent coding: 9 hours, 10 minutes

Minimum wait between csets during the sprint: 5 seconds
             (between 979b1a518812 and 7fce673b934a)

Approximate number of chat lines in #octave: 1200

Max number of users in #octave during the session: 41

Octave bugs detected while writing tests: 3

Octave bugs fixed during the sprint: 2

All in all, I think this was quite successful, even if we didn't get
to our goal of 150 files with tests. Congratulations to Andriy
Shinkarchuck, David Wells, Sean Young, and Giles Anderson who
contributed their first Octave patches during the sprint.

That was fun. We need to do this again in the near future. Maybe we
can make it a monthly thing. :-) But I really wouldn't want to wait
more than two months before the next sprint.

Happy hacking,
- Jordi G. H.
_______________________________________________
Help-octave mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.cae.wisc.edu/listinfo/help-octave

[Sergei Steshenko]

--- On Sun, 7/17/11, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From: Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: Code Sprint Results
> To: "Sergei Steshenko" <[hidden email]>
> Cc: "Octave Maintainers" <[hidden email]>, [hidden email], "Rik" <[hidden email]>
> Date: Sunday, July 17, 2011, 10:31 AM
> On 16 July 2011 23:23, Sergei
> Steshenko <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > In what release of Octave and/or its forge are we
> going to see the
> > bug fixes and what is the tentative date for the
> release(s) ?
>
> We haven't started thinking of a 3.6 release date yet, but
> we might
> have a 3.4.3 bugfix release soon, in a few months. There
> were only a
> few bugfixes during the code sprint; it was mostly about
> writing tests
> and socialising in chat. Except for one mistaken commit,
> the commits
> were all on the default development branch, so they won't
> be seen
> until 3.6 (they're mostly of developer interest anyways,
> since end
> users don't generally run the test suite).
>
> - Jordi G.H.
>

My mentors in VLSI design taught me that bug fixes have higher priority
than new features, and I totally agree with them.

Thanks,
  Sergei.
_______________________________________________
Help-octave mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.cae.wisc.edu/listinfo/help-octave

[Michael Godfrey]

On 07/17/2011 11:32 AM, Sergei Steshenko wrote:

My mentors in VLSI design taught me that bug fixes have higher priority
than new features, and I totally agree with them.

Thanks,
  Sergei.

Right!  But, as a teacher and implementer of VLSI, they should
also have reminded you that bug fixes  have bugs!  It would be
very useful if there were an effective DRC for software.

In any case, the code sprint seems to have been a great success.
Keep up the good work!

Michael


_______________________________________________
Help-octave mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.cae.wisc.edu/listinfo/help-octave

[Sergei Steshenko]

--- On Sun, 7/17/11, Michael D Godfrey <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Michael D Godfrey <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: Code Sprint Results
To: "Sergei Steshenko" <[hidden email]>
Cc: "Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso" <[hidden email]>, "Rik" <[hidden email]>, [hidden email], "Octave Maintainers" <[hidden email]>
Date: Sunday, July 17, 2011, 11:40 AM



 

   
  On 07/17/2011 11:32 AM, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
   
      My mentors in VLSI design taught me that bug fixes have higher priority
than new features, and I totally agree with them.

Thanks,
  Sergei.


   
    Right!  But, as a teacher
      and implementer of VLSI, they should

      also have reminded you that bug fixes  have bugs!  It would be

      very useful if there were an effective DRC for software.

     

      In any case, the code sprint seems to have been a great success.

      Keep up the good work!

     

      Michael

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

grep 'warning:' make.log | wc - l

seems to be a pretty good poor man's DRC.

Regards,
  Sergei.

 

_______________________________________________
Help-octave mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.cae.wisc.edu/listinfo/help-octave

[mshomam]

I am using version 9.1 and I am trying to figure out a better way to do test item analysis for our tests.  We always randomize the test questions, though we do not use pools. I know that in the grade center, there is a drop down with options to view test results.  However, what I need to be able to do is to see not all only of the results, but a better way to see who answered what question in what way.  http://methoo.com