Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [Libreoffice] New Windows tinderbox: Windows 2008R2
Rainer Bielefeld schrieb: GUID) aren't possible with MSI. If what Rainer wants is to have stable version of LibreOffice installed along with a testing version, Or more precisely: I have 10 ... 20 Master versions on my PC so that I can check where a regression came into the code. That could be done with the MinGW builds, but they are new and still lousy buggy, it will still cost some time until they will be in a shape that the can be used for real life tests. CU Rainer ___ 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] New Windows tinderbox: Windows 2008R2
Hi Rainer and we should try to waste as few as many time as possible. For me it's annoying to have to check every day various folders whether we have new builds. currently I mostly search in vain, and sometimes I find something I can't use; You can speedup the process by looking into http://tinderbox.libreoffice.org/MASTER/status.html I can see that all tinderboxes are being organized and listed according to this page https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Tinderbox I think this is a big step forward. Thank you all! ___ 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] QA ideas for 3.5 WAS Re: [Libreoffice] Improving the QA and Release for 3.5
Hi Cor, I have added QA and devel mailing lists into CC. We should not cook such an important event in background. Cor Nouws píše v Út 29. 11. 2011 v 00:06 +0100: Hi Yifan Petr, Is it OK for you if I proceed more or less as outlined below? I have some additional remarks that I'll take into account. I think I'll explain clearly to the people the way to Litmus for if they want to do the structural tests. I saw some work on changed naming. Is that already in place? Heh, we are going to do one more restructuralization in Litmus. Rimas implemented a nice feature yesterday. We are now able to mark some test cases as language and/or OS dependent. This option affects when the test will be marked as done in test run. This way we could get easier structure and optimize the testing efforts. Yi Fan is creating documentation at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Test_Cases_Organization Also he is going to update the existing test cases accordingly. He wants to finish this until Dec 6 or so. Another problem is that we still have only few testcases. We need to create more. We still could do it during the test phase. Any helping hands are welcome. Cor Nouws wrote (21-11-11 10:59) Cor Nouws wrote (19-11-11 16:56) Goal is (as discussed before) get more people's focus on early testing, rather then with the first RC, and also more people testing :-) I have draft the following schedule with special events: - With the first beta, two day's organised bug-hunting: - Friday 9 and Saturday 10 December - the beta-0, makes sure that reliable builds are there for all - mail all people on l10n lists and ask to spread the news - mail to discuss users - people available on irc for guidance It sounds good. Rainer is just afraid that we do not get enough people attention. He tried to do such events in the past and nobody appeared. Well, I am not sure how Rainer announced it. You might know better channels. - during the months, a two day's competition: - Saturday 14 and Sunday 15 January - a prize for the three that post most bug-weight in those two day's - bug weight: points/issue: 1 for normal, 1,5 for major, 2,5 for every blocker issue - severity needs to be confirmed by QA specialists (in max one week) - prizes are e.g. sweater and mug. - QA specialists cannot win a prize (they should just get the sweater and mug without that) I am not sure about this action. I am afraid that we could get too many bug reports and it will be hard to sort them, ... Note that we currently have only very few people doing the bug triage. Another problem is who would judge the results :-) - with the first RC, two day's organised bug-hunting - Friday 20 and Saturday 21 January - ... (see above for more) Same as for the first bug hunting session. When I think about it, we have a chicken and egg problem. I am afraid that we do not have enough active QA people that would help to organize such event. On the other hand, such action could bring new people or get them from the hiding corner. I would try a well announced bug-hunting session. If we get enough people there, I would skip the competition because it is hard to organize. Another question is how to instruct people during the bug-hunting session. We do not have enough test cases. One possibility would be to ask them to create them as described at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Test_Case Otherwise, it would end in a chaotic testing. Well, it would be better than nothing. Best Regards, Petr ___ 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] QA ideas for 3.5 WAS Re: [Libreoffice] Improving the QA and Release for 3.5
Hi Petr, Petr Mladek wrote (29-11-11 11:54) I have added QA and devel mailing lists into CC. We should not cook such an important event in background. Agreed - that is why I started at the list initially of course ;-) Cor Nouws píše v Út 29. 11. 2011 v 00:06 +0100: Is it OK for you if I proceed more or less as outlined below? I have some additional remarks that I'll take into account. I think I'll explain clearly to the people the way to Litmus for if they want to do the structural tests. I saw some work on changed naming. Is that already in place? Heh, we are going to do one more restructuralization in Litmus. Rimas implemented a nice feature yesterday. We are now able to mark some test cases as language and/or OS dependent. This option affects when the test will be marked as done in test run. This way we could get easier structure and optimize the testing efforts. Ah cool. That reads to me as a feature that will prevent more people doing the same test without good reason. Yi Fan is creating documentation at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Test_Cases_Organization Also he is going to update the existing test cases accordingly. He wants to finish this until Dec 6 or so. Another problem is that we still have only few testcases. We need to create more. We still could do it during the test phase. Any helping hands are welcome. I saw your note in an earlier mail yes. But did not really think about it, sorry. Is it a good idea if for the next 7/8 weeks we focus on as much testing as possible and that we after that try to encourage people to help with writing tests cases? Cor Nouws wrote (19-11-11 16:56) Goal is (as discussed before) get more people's focus on early testing, rather then with the first RC, and also more people testing :-) I have draft the following schedule with special events: - With the first beta, two day's organised bug-hunting: - Friday 9 and Saturday 10 December - the beta-0, makes sure that reliable builds are there for all - mail all people on l10n lists and ask to spread the news - mail to discuss users - people available on irc for guidance It sounds good. Rainer is just afraid that we do not get enough people attention. He tried to do such events in the past and nobody appeared. Well, I am not sure how Rainer announced it. You might know better channels. I share his experience from years past that it is not easy. On the other hand: - all we get on testing early is important; - we might help l10n people/groups to present it. Announcing the first beta of the next great LibreOffice (- features..) and a bug hunt session, sure will get some media attention. Which is good for the overall project and good for the l10n teams... Of course, needs some preparation, but should not be too difficult. I have some hours available this and next week to help. - during the months, a two day's competition: - Saturday 14 and Sunday 15 January - a prize for the three that post most bug-weight in those two day's - bug weight: points/issue: 1 for normal, 1,5 for major, 2,5 for every blocker issue - severity needs to be confirmed by QA specialists (in max one week) - prizes are e.g. sweater and mug. - QA specialists cannot win a prize (they should just get the sweater and mug without that) I am not sure about this action. I am afraid that we could get too many bug reports and it will be hard to sort them, ... Note that we currently have only very few people doing the bug triage. That is a possible trap, yes. Maybe there are some simple way's to make it better (will think about that later, but of course, hints welcome..) So best is the we start with the first step, and in the mean while think about if a competition can be managed in a pretty fair way. Another problem is who would judge the results :-) I thought you would like to volunteer ;-) - with the first RC, two day's organised bug-hunting - Friday 20 and Saturday 21 January - ... (see above for more) Same as for the first bug hunting session. Same for me ;-) When I think about it, we have a chicken and egg problem. I am afraid that we do not have enough active QA people that would help to organize such event. On the other hand, such action could bring new people or get them from the hiding corner. Agree. So what might help is find some support in organising, I think I can do that. I would try a well announced bug-hunting session. If we get enough people there, I would skip the competition because it is hard to organize. Might be a good choice - as written before, we can decide later. Another question is how to instruct people during the bug-hunting session. We do not have enough test cases. One possibility would be to ask them to create them as described at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Test_Case Otherwise, it would end in a chaotic testing. Well, it would be better than nothing. Chaotic tests give great results - if people can write down the results
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] QA ideas for 3.5 WAS Re: [Libreoffice] Improving the QA and Release for 3.5
Cor Nouws píše v Út 29. 11. 2011 v 15:34 +0100: Petr Mladek wrote (29-11-11 11:54) Rimas implemented a nice feature yesterday. We are now able to mark some test cases as language and/or OS dependent. This option affects when the test will be marked as done in test run. This way we could get easier structure and optimize the testing efforts. Ah cool. That reads to me as a feature that will prevent more people doing the same test without good reason. Exactly. Another problem is that we still have only few testcases. We need to create more. We still could do it during the test phase. Any helping hands are welcome. I saw your note in an earlier mail yes. But did not really think about it, sorry. Is it a good idea if for the next 7/8 weeks we focus on as much testing as possible and that we after that try to encourage people to help with writing tests cases? I would encourage people to do both. Testing is important. On the other hand, the written tests help to avoid duplication. Also they are inspiration for people that have less experience. Note most of the test make sense to duplicate on Windows, Linux, and MAC. I would write it the way that we are looking for testers. Any test make sense. We want to do the existing tests from Litmus. They are also inspiration for people that are in doubts. On the other hand, if anyone does an interesting test that is missing in Litmus, we kindly ask them to document it there. The description need not be perfect, we could always improve it later. I think that people do not need to do this only during the bug-hunting session. They could do it at any time. We should mention links to the documentation, .e.g. http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Regression_Tests http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Test_Case http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Test_Cases_Contribution Cor Nouws wrote (19-11-11 16:56) - With the first beta, two day's organised bug-hunting: - Friday 9 and Saturday 10 December - the beta-0, makes sure that reliable builds are there for all - mail all people on l10n lists and ask to spread the news - mail to discuss users - people available on irc for guidance It sounds good. Rainer is just afraid that we do not get enough people attention. He tried to do such events in the past and nobody appeared. Well, I am not sure how Rainer announced it. You might know better channels. I share his experience from years past that it is not easy. On the other hand: - all we get on testing early is important; - we might help l10n people/groups to present it. Announcing the first beta of the next great LibreOffice (- features..) and a bug hunt session, sure will get some media attention. Which is good for the overall project and good for the l10n teams... Of course, needs some preparation, but should not be too difficult. I have some hours available this and next week to help. Sounds good to me. - during the months, a two day's competition: - Saturday 14 and Sunday 15 January - a prize for the three that post most bug-weight in those two day's - bug weight: points/issue: 1 for normal, 1,5 for major, 2,5 for every blocker issue - severity needs to be confirmed by QA specialists (in max one week) - prizes are e.g. sweater and mug. - QA specialists cannot win a prize (they should just get the sweater and mug without that) I am not sure about this action. I am afraid that we could get too many bug reports and it will be hard to sort them, ... Note that we currently have only very few people doing the bug triage. That is a possible trap, yes. Maybe there are some simple way's to make it better (will think about that later, but of course, hints welcome..) So best is the we start with the first step, and in the mean while think about if a competition can be managed in a pretty fair way. Yup, I like this step by step approach. Another problem is who would judge the results :-) I thought you would like to volunteer ;-) Please not! It would be my nightmare. I would be stressed that I would not be objective :-) Another question is how to instruct people during the bug-hunting session. We do not have enough test cases. One possibility would be to ask them to create them as described at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Test_Case Otherwise, it would end in a chaotic testing. Well, it would be better than nothing. Chaotic tests give great results - if people can write down the results in a structure way of course ;-) I can draft a page to get just the people in the bug-hunt sessions on the right track. That would be great if you could draft something. Best Regards, Petr ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems?
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [Libreoffice] New Windows tinderbox: Windows 2008R2
Fridrich Strba schrieb: Instead of setup.exe /a one should call msiexec.exe /a Hello, yes, that will work (and I remember that we already had this proceeding for a while). I added some hints on https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Installing_in_parallel#Windows Kind regards Rainer ___ 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/
[Libreoffice-qa] [ANNOUNCE] libreoffice-3.5.0.0 tag created (3.5.0-beta0)
Hi, there have been created the libreoffice-3.5.0.0 tag for 3.5.0-beta0 release. The corresponding official builds will be available by the end of the week. The main purpose of this build is to make sure that we are able to create usable builds, with release configuration, from master. The real game will start the following week after the feature freeze. Master is very living branch. I had troubles to build it today. So, I based the tag on snapshot from yesterday, about 16:35UTC. It was the point of last successful Windows build. In addition, I cherry picked several nldsolver-related fixes. At least one of them was necessary for building with more localizations. I have successfully built it on Linux-x86_64. Though, you might need some extra fixes on other platforms or Linux systems. We will get more stable code base after the feature freeze. I hope that beta2 will be buildable almost everywhere out of box (if you commit the fix ;-) The list of changes against 3.4.0-beta1 (branch point for 3.5) is quite large. You might get it at http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/pre-releases/src/bugfixes-master-release-3.5.0.0.log http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/pre-releases/src/commit-log-master-release-3.5.0.0.log See also the schedule at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan#3.5_release and release criteria at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Release_Criteria Now, if you want to switch your clone to the tag, please do: ./g fetch --tags ./g checkout -b tag-libreoffice-3.5.0.0 libreoffice-3.5.0.0 Best Regards, Petr ___ 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/
