1
edit
Changes
no edit summary
Now that we are aware of the different concepts that we must take into account with regards to delta debugging, the next section will outline some facts and assumptions that are being made, and attempt to define the vision and process of the delta debugging framework.
== Project Facts and Assumptions ==
I read through your documentation here, and it is looking good. I also spoke to Shaver by phone this morning, and we chatted briefly about this project. He suggests that you start your work by looking for a suitable '''Crash Case''', one that happens reliably. Then you need at what would be necessary in order to bisect the change set (e.g., [http://www.mozilla.org/bonsai.html bonsai] data) in order to get closer to the change that introduced the bug. Shaver suggested that robc (Rob Campbell) might be a good person to help you brainstorm on this.
== How to Get Involved ==
If you are looking for an easy way in which to contribute to this project, you can jump in by writing one or more tests for the test suite. This does not require that you learn about the delta debugging inner-workings or structure.
Basic Advice:
* You '''must''' be able to automate the test--no human intervention is allowed.
* Possible test types include: crashing, performance-related, program hanging, unexpected return codes.
* Each test will fit into the test framework (which, at this point, still has to be designed). The tests must follow a few rules (again, undecided at this point).
Please check back in a few days. Expect some templates and samples up shortly to help get you going.
