On 30.08.2012 10:43, Zhe Liu wrote:
2012/8/30 Andre Fischer <[email protected]>:
On 30.08.2012 04:09, Shenfeng Liu wrote:
+1 for test data and test script in a separated tree. Test documents
should
never be distributed together with product code. Only the sample documents
in tutorials should.
Another advantage for a separated QE tree is that a volunteer can download
any AOO build and run the same test suite from the QE tree again and
again,
a easy way of regression and even automation.
Good idea, a third use case: use pre-built office and only the test/ source
code.
Right! The current main/test is not used for code unit test. It 's
used to test a real AOO instance.
A complex situation maybe the UT by developer that calls internal
functions. Sometimes developers like to write UT code together with the
product code. But will a sample document be used in UT?
Even when we move the testing stuff one level higher to be on the same level
as main/ and ext_libraries/ then an SVN checkout still puts it on your local
disk. The advantage of that move would be that
a) you can avoid checking out test/ and
b) it becomes easier to avoid including test/ in the source release.
No problem for me to move test up. ooo/trunk/main/test -> ooo/trunk/test
It's OK for me. Except of test module, there is a lot of other test
legacy which should be moved up or removed from svn. e.g.
testautomation, smoketestdoc, smoketestoo_native , qadevOOo, {Some
Modules}/qa, and testgraphical.
It's a complex thing. I can volunteer for this.
Great. Would it make sense to move everything test related that is
currently in use to ooo/trunk/test/ and leave the old stuff in place
where it can be deleted eventually?
-Andre
Are there any volunteers for this move? I would do it myself but I am on
vacation for the next three weeks.
-Andre
- Simon
2012/8/30 Dave Fisher <[email protected]>
On Aug 29, 2012, at 11:24 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
On 08/29/2012 10:51 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Andre Fischer <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 29.08.2012 16:02, Rob Weir wrote:
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 9:52 AM, Andre Fischer <[email protected]>
wrote:
Hi,
I just saw that we have now two new binary files in the test/
module.
main/test/testgui/data/svt/complex.ods has a size of 9 424 385 Bytes
and
main/test/testgui/data/svt/complex.odt has a size of 27 175 936
Bytes.
I wonder if SVN is really the best place for files that large.
I also don't think that these files should be part of the source
release.
But what else would have to be removed that depends on these files?
Any thoughts?
Something to keep in mind is that we'll probably end up with a large
number of test documents, 200+ MB. Not all of them will be large.
But if we want to have good test coverage then we'll need test
documents to cover all areas, for ODF, MS Binaries and OOXML. So
this
will grow, over time, to a large test set.
This leads to four questions:
1) Should we be testing large/complex documents?
I think the answer is "yes".
Agreed.
2) Should such test documents be in SVN?
I think they should.
Agreed.
3) Should these documents be in the same source tree with the rest of
the code that is downloaded by default for a build?
Maybe not. Unless they are needed for a smoke test that should be
run
by every developer. But if not, maybe they should be stored in its
own tree, like ooo/test/trunk or something like that.
4) Should these documents be included in the source distribution?
Probably depends on the answer to question 3. Maybe, maybe not. Or
maybe we have a separate source distribution artifact only for
test-related files?
My personal opinion is no. I believe that the use case for
downloading and
building the source release is different from the use case for cloning
the
SVN repository. I would expect the source release to be used for
building
AOO, maybe do a simple test to verify that building was successful,
and then
delete the source code.
OK. That is a useful distinction: building versus developing.
I think Building versus QA - both are developing.
If I want to start developing then I would choose SVN. Complex tests
would
help me to avoid new errors.
I don't see the need for complex tests when my goal is not developing.
Lack
of trust that we did not run the tests on the released code?
But, of course I can be wrong (and often are :-).
If we follow that logic, then we might still store the test data and
test code in SVN, but in its own tree, e.g., /ooo/test/trunk.
This also preserves the option of us having a "test source" artifact
in a future release, if we wanted.
-Rob
+1, this seems like a good compromise
I don' think the "test" cases should be in the same tree as source.
Agreed.
No use overloading developers who simply want to build and make
modifications.
Source is required as an Open Source release. (we should all understand
that.)
QA / test is "optional" but quite important. It should be separate and we
can include a "QA" package as one of our convenience binaries during a
release.
Regards,
Dave
-Andre
-Rob
Regards,
Andre
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"As a child my family's menu consisted of two choices:
take it or leave it. "
-- Buddy Hackett
