On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 6:34 PM, Simon Schampijer <[email protected]> wrote: > On 02/11/2010 12:20 AM, Walter Bender wrote: >> >> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Simon Schampijer<[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 02/10/2010 03:14 AM, Mel Chua wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> - Testing instructions: As described in the "Feature Status" mail, the >>>>>> feature owners have to fill out the "How to test" section in the >>>>>> Feature >>>>>> page before the testing day. This should be as detailed as possible, >>>>>> imagine what could possibly go wrong and how a tester could test that >>>>>> Feature without having the technical background and has not been >>>>>> working >>>>>> on that Feature for days, weeks or months. >>>> >>>> Do we have a way for feature owners to put tests somewhere testers >>>> will know to look for them, and do we have a way for testers to file >>>> their results? (In other words, do we have a test case system?) >>> >>> For the moment we only have the "How to test" section in the Feature >>> page itself. There is no test case system yet. Actually, as I tried to >>> point out in my mail, we weren't that lucky to have a QA team for the >>> 0.84-0.88 releases. This testing day is a start to get people involved >>> :) Having good QA happening is so important for the quality of our >>> "product". There is so much we can do... >>> >>>> I'm working on getting a semantic mediawiki based test case system >>>> (similar to the one we used to have at OLPC) going in a sandbox for >>>> the SoaS deployment I'm working with in Boston, but that may not be up >>>> in time, nor appropriate for longer-term results like Saturday's test >>>> session. I suppose that in a pinch we could always list everything on >>>> the wiki (I'd be happy to come in an hour early and set this up if >>>> needed) but if we're going to be doing more QA activities down the >>>> line, we might someday want a system that scales and is more >>>> searchable. Not a vital-to-solve-now problem, but a definite "someday >>>> we'll have to solve this" problem, in case anyone has any quick ideas. >>>> >>>> --Mel >>> >>> Absolutely, agreed! I think the test cases we had at OLPC would be a >>> good start. The future QA-team would probably take the information from >>> the Feature page and create full fledged Test cases. >>> >>> And of course - there should be a smoke test... >>> >>> Thanks for your thoughts, >>> Simon >> >> >> Is the intention just to test just Fructose or also Glucose? I am at >> the point where more broad testing of the new Turtle Art (Glucose) >> would be very helpful. >> >> regards. >> >> -walter > > My main intention for this Saturday testing day was to find the bugs in the > Features that landed and to find out where we can optimize the UI including > strings too. We have an UI freeze next Monday and String freeze one week > after that [1]. > > Of course, if people want to test activities too, I am more than happy about > it. If you put your latest version in ASLO we can include it into the image > for Saturday.
Is there a way to put something in ASLO and not have it trigger the update process, i.e., mark it as beta? In any case, there is a .xo bundle here: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/images/e/e6/TurtleArt-83.xo -walter > Thanks, > Simon > > PS: There are still open seats for the meeting, better to take action now > and sign in on the wiki page [2]! > > [1] http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.88/Roadmap#Schedule > [2] http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.88/Testing > > > -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
