On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 12:05, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On May 21, 2010, at 12:04 PM, Vincent Massol wrote: > > > Hi Denis, > > > > On May 21, 2010, at 11:34 AM, Denis Gervalle wrote: > > > >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 19:23, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> On May 20, 2010, at 7:15 PM, dgervalle (SVN) wrote: > >>> > >>>> Author: dgervalle > >>>> Date: 2010-05-20 19:15:53 +0200 (Thu, 20 May 2010) > >>>> New Revision: 28950 > >>>> > >>>> Modified: > >>>> > >>> > platform/web/branches/xwiki-web-2.3/standard/src/main/webapp/resources/js/xwiki/table/livetable.js > >>>> Log: > >>>> XWIKI-5212 - Livetable filter serialization does not properly support > >>> multi-valued form elements > >>>> Merge from trunk r28947 > >>> > >>> Do we have a test for this? How do we unit-test UI components? > >>> > >> > >> This would be nice to have. Building proper tests is not so easy, this > could > >> be very long to setup, since you need to test in several browsers and > you > >> need full AJAX interaction. I am not used to such automated testing, but > I > >> am not sure the investment is worse the improvement we could get from > them. > > > > It's always worth it. > > Note that the hard part is getting started with it. Once you have your > first test, it's usually very easy to add a second test afterwards and it > doesn't take long. > Fine, so I let you write all the tests for the initial and basic live table functionalities, and once these are available, I will complete them to test the new features I have recently added ;) So, just to be serious, I completely agree with you regarding the advantage of automated tests. But my current feeling about XWiki and its current UI is that we are not moving fast enough compare to the competition. As well as there is great components (ie new rendering), there are on the other side a really bad/complex/tricky/not working UIs compare to similar products. If I want to be able to continue my contribution on the project (and I d'like to), I have to concentrate on improving the end user experience first, and gets new clients paying for my work. So I am sorry if I cannot currently meet your quality expectations, I just hope that my intensive usage and testing already helps improving the product quality, since this is the best I can do right now. Denis > Thanks > -Vincent > > > > >> On the other side, I use livetables JS heavily, so you could be assured > that > >> my fixes/improvements are either well tested or will be fixed ASAP since > all > >> changes I introduce is already in production. > > > > While this is good enough for you as an individual we cannot rely on this > at the project level. We do need absolutely automated tests written for > everything that gets committed to ensure the quality of XWiki releases. > > > >> We also usually test them on > >> all supported browsers, and at least on IE6/7/8, FF3 (Win/Mac), Safari4 > >> (Mac) and Chrome (Mac) > >> FYI, I found this one when we have introduced the usage of hashes to > provide > >> "Back to the list" links. I will soon commit an improvement supporting > the > >> page size in hash as well, so you can really get very precise "back to > the > >> list" return links. > >> > >> Denis > > > > So you could either write a functional tests using ui-tests or define a > new strategy for testing "XWiki UI Components". > > > > IMO you should start with livetable tests in ui-tests. > > > > Thanks > > -Vincent > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > -- Denis Gervalle SOFTEC sa - CEO eGuilde sarl - CTO _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
