Hi, Thorsten Ziehm schrieb: > Hi Mathias, > >>>> Do you think it's worth it? >>>> >>> I think it's not primarly the matter of running the regression-suite >>> before QA approval but to have a small set of meaningful regression >>> tests available ? >> >> Exactly, and I would prefer to have regression tests based on the API or >> complex test framework and not based on the GUI testtool. We shouldn't >> raise even more barriers to contribution. >> > > I'm really on your side! But how many complex tests do we have? How high > is the code coverage with API tests in complex scenarios. I do not think > that we have enough test scripts on coding level. If we have it, then we > should make them mandatory quickly. Perhaps then the tests on GUI level > with TestTool could be unnecessarily.
how high is the code coverage of TestTool? Both can be extended. I have planned to establish an automated UNO-API testing for CWS and Master. The CWS tests should be started in EIS like ConvWatch, the Master would be tested automatically as soon as they are available. This should be done until end of summer (hopefully). The UNO-API test will be a distributed test. Means, that the whole API is splitted into small pieces. A pool of test machines are registered on a server which distribute the pieces. If for example three tests machines available the UNO-API test is done in 4-6 hours. If there are more, the test is faster. A next step should be to enable the community to participate on UNO-API test. Gruß, cn --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
