[Cmusphinx-devel] [Fwd: Fw: [cmusphinx - Sphinx4 Open Discussion] RE: Facing input problem test demo helloworld]

[Peter W. <op...@gm...>]

   ------Original Message------
   From: SourceForge.net
   To: no...@so...
   Sent: Apr 22, 2009 3:56 AM
   Subject: [cmusphinx - Sphinx4 Open Discussion] RE: Facing input 
problem test demo helloworld


   Read and respond to this message at:    
https://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=7259311
   By: nshmyrev

   Then it's a bug that was fixed in beta2, unfortunately other bugs 
were introduced.
   So I can't suggest you anything to try right now.



This just kills me :-(

Do we have unit tests for these "bugs that were introduced"?  I would 
like to add them to our regression test suite.

BTW I still have received only 3 +1's for my offer to get the nightly 
build/test running.  They are from Nickolay, Joe and Bhiksha.

Since Evandro is extremely busy now, should I try an "Experimental" 
Hudson system using the code on GitHub?  Noone outside of this group 
would know about it.

> Hi all,
>
> My impression is that we are no longer doing the Nightly Build.  Is 
> this true?
>
> So, while we are thinking about how to do Git, what to do about Rake, 
> and whether to accept any of the experimental code moves... would 
> anybody be upset if I got the Nightly Build working again?
>
> I have several times heard that the performance of Sphinx4 has 
> "degraded" lately.  I don't know if this is true (it works well in my 
> app), but I'd really like to find out by running the performance tests.
>
> More importantly, I think it is vital to have the NB running before 
> making any major changes to Sphinx4.  Even moving code could have 
> unforeseen consequences.  We will all probably feel much more 
> comfortable with proposed changes, once we are measuring stability and 
> performance thoroughly.
>
> My plan is to get Evandro's scripts going again from the SVN 
> repository.  Then I will make an experimental version that pulls 
> experimental code from GitHub.  Finally, I would like to evaluate 
> Hudson and then perhaps propose it for our next generation build system.
>
> Please give me +1's or -1's, because I don't want to assume that 
> silence is agreement.