This sounds like a great idea to me. The timing would certainly be tight but I think with the VMs and Vagrant usage we should be good. I'll ping Michael and see what he thinks.
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 14:12:08 -0700 > From: Chris McMahon <[email protected]> > To: "QA (software quality assurance) for Wikimedia projects." > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [QA] Weekend testing americas on September 7th > Message-ID: > < > cajohbhturqx7g5ehk1q2ant+gtfzp4gpvqj3xjzh2_x2fsk...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 6:43 AM, Justin Rohrman <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Let's hear it :) > > > > Here goes... > > There is a certain tension in the testing community between advocates for > UI/browser test automation and advocates for human "sapient" testing. I'd > like to go there. > > Specifically, I'd like to do this with Weekend Testing: > > * Pick a complex feature for which browser test automation exists. Right > now I'm thinking CirrusSearch or VisualEditor. Because we're using > Cucumber, the test Scenarios should be understandable by people who are not > programmers. Because we're using the page_object Ruby gem, the guts of the > tests should be readable by people with programming experience in just > about any language. Regardless of level of expertise, we should be able > to provide everyone a local test environment from which to run the > automated tests against WMF hosts either natively or with a VirtualBox VM > configured via vagrant (http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Vagrant). We have > done this before: > > online: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Meetings/2013-07-18 > live: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Meetings/2013-06-27 > > Given a robust set of automated browser tests and the ability to run them, > let us then: > > * Identify deficiencies in the automated test coverage for the feature. > This may or may not include analysis of the test code itself, but would > certainly at least include analysis of the ATDD-style stated feature > coverage in the Cucumber Scenarios. Do we have any technical debt in our > test code? > > * Identify test charters for which automated testing is not possible and > which are only testable by actual human beings. Are there tests that > cannot be automated, and is such testing worthwhile? > > Outcomes: > > * Participants will be able to analyze ATDD-style automated browser tests > * Participants will be able to run Cucumber + page_object browser tests and > analyze the results of those tests > * Participants will be able to demonstrate automated browser test practices > with examples from the open WMF browser test code > * Participants will be able to begin to contribute to WMF testing efforts > if they wish, whether automated or not > > This might be too ambitious. I'm pretty sure this would be the most > technically challenging session in the history of WTA. OTOH, we've already > built the infrastructure to do this kind of thing, let's spread the word > about what is possible. > > -Chris > > > > > > > Message: 2 > >> Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 08:56:54 -0700 > >> From: Chris McMahon <[email protected]> > >> To: "QA (software quality assurance) for Wikimedia projects." > >> > >> <[email protected]> > >> Subject: Re: [QA] Weekend testing americas on September 7th > >> Message-ID: > >> < > >> cajohbhqzwk5h9wegs-serhe0fazrss08wjigw-unb7abe-x...@mail.gmail.com> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > >> > >> > >> I actually have an idea that I think would be of interest to WTA and of > >> benefit to WMF, but I'd like to encourage others to reply first.. > >> > >> -C > >> > >> > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > QA mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/qa > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/qa/attachments/20130815/e6688311/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > QA mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/qa > > > End of QA Digest, Vol 4, Issue 13 > ********************************* >
_______________________________________________ QA mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/qa
