harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexey Petrenko" <alexey.a.petre...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] Discussion: how to keep up stability and fast progress all together?
Date Wed, 04 Apr 2007 08:49:39 GMT
2007/4/4, Stepan Mishura <stepan.mishura@gmail.com>:
> On 4/4/07, Alexey Petrenko wrote:
> <SNIP>
> > > > I'd like to propose the next approach that may help us to know about
> > > > instabilities: develop (or take existing one, for example, Eclipse
> > > > hello world) a scenario for testing stability and configure CC to run
> > > > it at all times. The stability scenario must be the only one scenario
> > > > for CC; it must be short (no longer then an hour), test JRE in stress
> > > > conditions and cover most of functionality. If the scenario fails then
> > > > all newly committed updates are subject for investigation and fix (or
> > > > rollback).
> > > Actually, I prefer something without GUI
> > I do not think that remove GUI testing from CC and other stability
> > testing is a good way to go. Because awt and swing modules are really
> > big and complicated pieces of code.
> >
>
> Sorry for the confusion - I agree that we should continue running
> AWT/Swing tests under CC. But we are talking about scenario that can
> be used for testing stability in terms of race conditions. The first
> scenario that spread in my mind was Eclipse hello world testing
> scenario: it is quite short, verifies core functionality and so on.
> But Vladimir claimed that there might be some issues related to GUI
> testing and we may have a number of 'false alarms'.
In fact Eclipse does not use awt and swing at all so it can not be
used as a test for these modules.


> BTW, do you have any scenario in mind that can be used a stability
> criteria (of cause in terms of race conditions)?
jEdit?
But I'm not sure that it works ok on current class library :)

SY, Alexey

> > > or at least without using
> > > special 'GUI testing" tools. It should improve quality of this testing
> > > (than less tools than more predictable results :)) Current "Eclipse
> > > hello world" scenario based on the AutoIT for Win and X11GuiTest for
> > > Linux platform. Also we have this scenario based on API calls which
> > > should emulate GUI scenario. From these 2 approaches I prefer second
> > > to minimize 'false alarms'. Or may be some other scenarios (non-GUI)?
> > >
> > >  Thanks, Vladimir
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Thought? Objections?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Stepan.
> > > >
> > > > > I read the discussion on naming, and M1, M2, ... is fine by me. 
How
> > > > > about we pick a proposed date for Apache Harmony M1?
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Tim
> > > > >
>
> --
> Stepan Mishura
> Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division
>

Mime
View raw message