Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus

2012-12-20 Thread Yifan Jiang
Dear fellows, Thanks for a nice discussion with Petr, Rimas, Sophie etc, with Florian's great help, we now have a much more pretty name for Moztrap :-) manual-test.libreoffice.org I have got the stuff updated in Moztrap side today and done a bit of testing of the new name myself. It looks

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus

2012-12-20 Thread Petr Mladek
Quoting Yifan Jiang yfji...@suse.com: Dear fellows, Thanks for a nice discussion with Petr, Rimas, Sophie etc, with Florian's great help, we now have a much more pretty name for Moztrap :-) manual-test.libreoffice.org I have got the stuff updated in Moztrap side today and done a bit of

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus

2012-12-20 Thread klaus-jürgen weghorn ol
Am 20.12.2012 12:02, schrieb Yifan Jiang: In addition, the wiki page needs to update as well, I guess it will be as simple as changing all vm12.documentfoundation.org to the new name :) I'll do it later on any way. I think I got the most links on the wiki. Please check. -- Grüße k-j

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus

2012-12-20 Thread Yi Fan Jiang
Hi klaus-jürgen, That's fabulous, thanks a lot for your work! ;-) Best wishes, Yifan klaus-jürgen weghorn olo...@sophia-louise.de 12/20/12 8:13 PM Am 20.12.2012 12:02, schrieb Yifan Jiang: In addition, the wiki page needs to update as well, I guess it will be as simple as changing all

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

2012-03-22 Thread Rimas Kudelis
2012.03.22 01:00, Pedro rašė: Bjoern Michaelsen wrote Register mail just took a while. Which brings us to the original problem: why doesn't it support OpenID from the beginning? In a little over a month, AskLibO already has nearly 600 users. How much clearer does the message need to be?

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

2012-03-22 Thread Bjoern Michaelsen
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:44:46PM -0700, Pedro wrote: I thought it was what WE (you , me, TDF, the LO project,etc) are missing. That is already perfectly clear -- as you know we already have a bug for that -- and thus need no repeating. But punching the codeconductor devs for not having your

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

2012-03-22 Thread Bjoern Michaelsen
Hi Pedro, On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:04:51AM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote: That is already perfectly clear -- as you know we already have a bug for that -- and thus need no repeating. But punching the codeconductor devs for not having your pet feature in a prerelease of their free (as in

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

2012-03-22 Thread Pedro
is indeed a wiser option from a privacy point of view... http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/5323/what-are-the-downsides-of-browserid-compared-to-openid-oauth-facebook Thoughts? Regards, Pedro -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Litmus

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

2012-03-22 Thread Pedro
Bjoern Michaelsen wrote Can you maybe be on the QA call tomorrrow? I'm afraid not. 15:00 UTC on any weekday is during my work hours. I will read the minutes later. Regards, Pedro -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Litmus-a-proposal

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

2012-03-21 Thread Bjoern Michaelsen
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 02:27:20PM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote: The first and most important one is: it is behind its own login -- and that prevents the casual bypasser to get involved and interested. IMHO, we absolutely need to change that. The testcases should be browsable without a login

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

2012-03-21 Thread Bjoern Michaelsen
Hi Pedro, On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 11:45:29AM -0700, Pedro wrote: But adding it to the easy hacks doesn't it mean that it's off limits to the usual collaborators No, it only means that these task do not require a particulary deep knowledge of some arcane corners of the LibreOffice codebase.

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

2012-03-21 Thread Bjoern Michaelsen
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:26:49PM +0200, Rimas Kudelis wrote: For the reference: * I have a Litmus TODO list at https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Litmus_TODO. I'd be glad if you added bugzilla links and missing entries to it. As I've mentioned before, it would be really nice to maintain

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

2012-03-21 Thread Bjoern Michaelsen
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:16:51PM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote: I don't know, but it may not make sense to keep improving Litmus at that point. After all, if they settled for a rewrite, you just have to expect it to be so much better than the old tool, right? :) That might be the case --

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

2012-03-21 Thread Bjoern Michaelsen
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:16:51PM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote: They already have a staging server, but I cant get into it. Register mail just took a while. I now can walk around in: https://caseconductor-dev.allizom.org Its is all looking very nifty and web-2.0-ish. But unlike Litmus, I

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

2012-03-21 Thread Pedro
: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Litmus-a-proposal-tp3845560p3847106.html Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

2012-03-21 Thread Pedro
think this is important Bjoern Michaelsen wrote Maybe we could even throw a limited amount of dedicated funds in that direction? Regards, Pedro -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Litmus-a-proposal-tp3845560p3847644.html Sent from the QA

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus problem in Chrome and IE.

2011-11-03 Thread Rimas Kudelis
2011.11.03 06:16, Yifan Jiang rašė: Hi Rimas, Would you help to look a bit of this bug found by occasion, though I am not sure if someone else also meets the same problems. The bug may cause most of IE and Chrome users cannot filter test cases with usually used UI.