On 4/3/07, Vladimir Ivanov 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 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)?


Did I understand you correctly that there may be 'false alarms' caused
by using external 'GUI testing' tools? If yes which kind of 'false
alarms' are there?

Thanks,
Stepan.

 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

Reply via email to