Joerg Sievers wrote: > 2.2.0 > http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/OOoRelease1AutomationTestMatrix > #i71529 - Crash while pasting OLE in Calc > #i70517 - Office process does not end after exit (was i71766) > #i71882 - Crash while search into Starsuite Help - Fixed in OOE680m6 > #i71891 - Crash when importing extension > > 2.2.1 > http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/OOoRelease22AutomationTestMatrix > #74125 - (XML file format) ODF and OOo XML file format: Alien attributes > get lost in text style properties (integrated in OOF680m7) > #74334 - (Framework) Crash when loading signed documents (Fix scheduled > for OOF680m8, CWS fwk65) > #74372 - (Framework) Basic IDE Crash (Fixed in OOF680m7) > #74058 - (Framework) Closing Macro-editor crashes office. (integrated in > OOF680m7) > #74523 - (Draw/Impress) Loading html-document crashes office (integrated > in OOF680m8)
Thanks, it starts to become interesting. :-) So we seem to have some areas that look "promising". Are the proposed test cases able to find these regressions? What about the regressions that have been found by testing the RC builds? IIRC there have been a lot. Do the test cases cover the known "dark areas" like undo, test layout and especially currently painting/drawing? I assume that there are more areas that hopefully can be found out by lists like yours above. >> For example I would think that regression caused by broken resources >> doesn't occur that much any more, are also easy to find by broad >> testing. On the other hand I could image that regressions in document >> layout do occur much more often and would be reported much more later >> than broken resources ? > > Okay. If you exact mean a "broken resource", yes. We're nearly save in > that case. What I ment was a broken resource or broken call/use of > dialogs as we could see many of them above. The reason often is > missunderstandings, not enough knowledge of dependencies etc. and our > testing is finding such things with less clicks but if we start it in QA > process we are too late. It makes sense to find such things at the place > where they have been created. But testing *all* dialogs while only one was changed is an exaggeration, isn't it? That should be covered by more individual testing. Ciao, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS Please don't reply to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". I use it for the OOo lists and only rarely read other mails sent to it. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
