incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From xia zhao <lilyzh...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [RELEASE] Planning QA activities
Date Mon, 16 Apr 2012 09:54:17 GMT
2012/4/16 Andrea Pescetti <pescetti@apache.org>

> On 16/04/2012 xia zhao wrote:
>
>> 2012/4/16 Andrea Pescetti
>>
>> Sure, and it was great work. But those tests were run on versions that are
>>> now quite outdated. Example: the spell check test asks you to verify that
>>> no spell check is available and that dictionaries have been removed
>>> accurately, while we all know that things are quite different in current
>>> builds.
>>>
>> How do you means "tests were run on versions that are now quite outdated"?
>>
>
> http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/QA/**TestCases/<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/QA/TestCases/>has
several testcases that would only apply to older builds (like: testing
> removal of dictionaries, but these are now bundled; testing removal of
> fonts, but these are now replaced; testing removal of HTTP features, but in
> the meantime those have been replaced too).
> This wiki page is less update. Originally we plan using wiki to record
> test  cases and test result. But seems it isn't productive. Volunteers
> prefer to do testing and report the issues and result either by OOO-dev
> mail list or by BugZilla.And both test case page and test result page are
> less to be updated. It's better to use one test case management tool to
> track the progress. And I am planning propose one tool TestLink to
> community. For QA status based on scheduled build. You'd better checking
> the QA weekly status report.
>


>  1) Full QA is run on what we release. We need to ensure that OpenOffice
>>> works now, not that previous builds worked.
>>>
>>    Agree if the "Full" here means  test matrix on full platforms and full
>> langauges. The "OpenOffice" you means here I understand is AOO. For AOO,
>> the problem is we lost manual test cases
>>
>
> I wouldn't despair that we get them back at some point: as I wrote a long
> time ago, it would be enough to receive the test cases, the infrastructure
> for running them can be replaced.
>
New automation running infrastructure is developed and easy for volunteers
to develop new scripts. With more and more automation test cases developed
we can cover more and more regression testing.

>
> Regards,
>  Andrea.
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message