Yes, that's right, a test case, an example, a demo.
What I usually do is write a use case explaining the functional
requirements, then base on that I write a test case to test its
functionality, and finally if its added to the system, I write a test script
to make sure it always works as expected. For me a test suite is a group of
test cases that can be executed manually by a developer or end user.
If you look at other frameworks, like symfony or django, they provide good
documentation, but there's no way for the end user to test the
functionality, to see the code. For me there's no better documentation that
the code itself and no better example than a real one. When you read the
documentation you go: "umm, looks complicated", but when you see it you go
"ah, that's easy". How many time we needed something and we went to php's
manual and copied and pasted an example from there?
Without going any further, let's just look at ZF proposals. You have the use
cases there, and by just looking at them, you know straight away how to use
the component, and what the functional requirements are. So why not convert
them into test cases and put them in a place where others can easily find
them and use them?
ZF, Django, Symfony, CI, Cake and other frameworks, they all have videos and
screencasts, and it's a plus, but I consider an example to be much more
effective than a video.
Fed
----- Original Message -----
From: "AHeimlich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 9:18 PM
Subject: RE: [fw-general] ZF Proposal Process and Packaging. . .
I *think* what he's talking about is live examples with viewable source
code
wllm wrote:
I'm afraid I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'test suite', or- more
precisely- that doesn't sound like what I think of when I hear the
phrase 'test suite'. :) Do you have a URL that I could take a look at
with the tests you mention?
,Wil
-----Original Message-----
From: Federico Cargnelutti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 4:24 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [fw-general] ZF Proposal Process and Packaging. . .
I think it's a great idea. It will get more developers involved and
offer
more solutions to the users.
Here is another idea. I did a little experiment last year and created
a
test
suite in order to get other developers interested in the ZF. I added
around
8 test cases, each test had its own page, and each page had a div with
2
tabs, "example" and "source code". It was a huge success.
I think this is something very important that's actually missing in
the
website. It would be nice to see Reference Guide - APIs - Videos and
Test
Suite. IMO code is the best documentation, it helps users understand
what a
component does and how it works straight away, and of course, they get
to
see real examples.
Fed
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wil Sinclair" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Logan Buesching" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "till" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 7:28 PM
Subject: RE: [fw-general] ZF Proposal Process and Packaging. . .
And that's exactly the intention- to support development of components
that are 'Zend Framework' components but that we can't support. What
makes a component a 'Zend Framework' component? Well, sitting
alongside
ZF code in the library, using ZF coding standings, and having
dependencies on other framework components is certainly a good start.
But I would argue that more important than any one of those factors is
the assurance of quality that comes from unit test coverage and design
review from the Zend Framework community. This assurance is something
we
definitely want to bring to extras as well, so the intention is not to
allow a components of lower quality, rather to allow components that
we
can distribute while not supporting them.
,Wil
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Logan Buesching [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 9:34 AM
> To: till
> Cc: Wil Sinclair; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [fw-general] ZF Proposal Process and Packaging. . .
>
> Hello,
>
> Although I'm not sure how much my 2 cents weigh, I would like to say
> that I would really enjoy this feature.
>
> till wrote:
> > In general people look at the Zend Framework because they want
> > well-tested code. Code which is free to use (in regard to license)
> > etc.. I think support is another issue which people kind of expect
> > from you when they download of the zend.com domain. Now if only
> > everything but extras is qualified to meet the standards you set
upon
> > yourself, the rest should be dropped all together. It's messy
> > otherwise.
> >
> I do agree that when people see Zend, and especially the Zend
> Framework,
> they believe that it is quality code. This is why they are
suggesting
> that code in 'extras' meet their own requirements (or at least most
of
> them), but Zend themselves cannot support due to it's size. I look
at
> this the same way that many Linux distributions have 'official'
> packages
> that they support, then they have extras that are in the repository,
> but
> they don't support (as in Ubuntu and Universal). I think that it is
a
> wonderful idea, because it allows us developers to get a lot more
> features that will most likely be pretty well tested, but maybe not
> pristine.
>
> I would think that extending the Zend Framework would be a hassle if
> there is no way for the community to distribute their own
contributions
> through the help of Zend.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/ZF-Proposal-Process-and-Packaging.-.-.-tp14956236s16154p14975288.html
Sent from the Zend Framework mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
