Hi Petr, Rimas and all, On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 10:25:28PM +0200, Rimas Kudelis wrote:
> >> That is to say, even before we sort out how order of the test cases > >> could be implemented, we can always create specific test runs on > >> demand via the information of the priority "tags". > > BTW: How do you suggest to create the priority "tag"? Is there any > > better solution than to put it into prefix of the test case summary? > > Well, as an alternative, branches/groups/subgroups could be reviewed > again. :) The idea is actually brilliant! I also thought a bit in this way, but didn't conclude anything cenrtain at the moment. The problems I can think by leveraging branch/group/subgroup is 1. The test cases priority heavily depend on Litmus tool that it doesn't carry the information with their summaries. Instead, the group/subgroup/branch where they are in tell us the priority. 2. The maintainence effort and process may be increased a bit, but in a acceptable amount (at least for me). The benifits are: 1. Creating test runs can be easier that higher level definition would allow admins to create a specific priority test run simply by selecting corresponding subgroup, group or branch of test cases, instead of reviwing each test case's title. 2. The maintenence of test cases is assumed to be more elegant and intuitive. For example, we can change a test case's priority by change its corresponding subgroup, group or branch, instead of changing test case's title. The following is something they would look like, assume we don't change a lot the whole structure of current organization. Overall satistics: We now have 3 branches: master regression branch - 1 group - 7 subgroups in each group master l10n branch - 4 groups - 7 subgroups in each group master feature branch - we may not consider case priority here? Case 1. Carry priority information with subgroups name Prototype: Branch Master Function Regression Test Group: Function test Subgroup p1 writer Subgroup p2 writer Subgroup p3 writer Subgroup p4 writer Subgroup p1 calc Subgroup p2 calc Subgroup p3 calc ... Case 2. Carry priority information with groups name Prototype: Branch Master Function Regression Test Group: Function test p1 Subgroup writer Subgroup calc ... Group: Function test p2 Subgroup writer Subgroup calc ... Group: Function test p3 Subgroup writer Subgroup calc ... Case 3. Carry priority information with branches Branch Master Function Regression Test p1 Branch Master Function Regression Test p2 Branch Master Function Regression Test p3 Branch Master Function Regression Test p4 All the structure inside different priority branches are the same. Branch Master L10n Regression Test p1 Branch Master L10n Regression Test p2 Branch Master L10n Regression Test p3 Branch Master L10n Regression Test p4 All the structure inside different priority branches are the same. I am slightly inclined to the Case 3, it still keeps most of original things (groups and subroups), which have already been divided in a clear logic and not that easy to get familiar with. Also Case 3 is the most easy way if we want to create different runs in different phase of release. Intuitively, we can "feel" all the three cases by describe a particular l10n test case in each: Case 1 - subgroup. This is a P1 writer test case in English locale for regression testing Case 2 - group This is a P1 English locale writer test case for regression testing Case 3 - branch This is a P1 regression test case for writer in an English locale I feel Case 2 is hard to describe :) Case 1 is okay, but it doesn't really take advantage against Case 3. It would be interesting if you share some your ideas of cons/prons of them. :) Best wishes, Yifan _______________________________________________ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/