Re: [libreoffice-projects] QA manual test Litmus session on 3.3.3Rc
Hi Spohie, I deleted those parts where we agree. Am Montag, den 06.06.2011, 18:36 +0300 schrieb Sophie Gautier: > > If not the language does not matter and there is no need to translate > > und multiply the work with translating all the tests in more than 100 > > languages. > > It's important to offer an access to everybody. Are there any rough estimations how many people are affected that can not contribute in this technical process because of the need to read basic English texts? As I said, bugzilla, easy hacks, LibOCon, this project list, ... When I see what is discussed on the german discuss list (reworking of the download page) where the non-german speaking community is not aware of and can not take part in the discussion, and probably similar things going on on other language mailing lists, I believe we already lose so much by not using the same language that connects us way to often. > > Litmus becomes unusable and getting statistics gets much > > harder as you have to aggregate over all the languages. > > I'm following the next generation Mozilla is working on. I think we > won't have more than 15/20 languages at the beginning, so that won't > hurt Litmus so much. But we will be able to improve our process and tooling. That would easily result in more than 1000 testcases that have some obscure tagging and categorizing in the testcase summary. If I look into the mozilla litmus I can just guess why they do not use localized testcases this way. I believe this is a huge trade-off and not worth it. Litmus is already complicated enough to use, working around the workflow to get some localization feature into it that is not cleanly integrated into the application just makes it worse. I fear that through making it look more complex we will scare more people away than we reach through the localizations that first have to written. And by the way all those users of the languages that are not in your estimated 15/20 languages do not even have the opportunity. But I agree to disagree here. Regards, Michael -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to projects+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/projects/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-projects] QA manual test Litmus session on 3.3.3Rc
Hi, Am Montag, den 06.06.2011, 12:56 +0200 schrieb klaus-jürgen weghorn ol: > Some things Christian K. mentioned on the German-ml [1]: [...] > 2. The German tests are different from the English. Is there any problem > with it? I do see some advantages in having tests regarding localization in all the languages. But I am not sure if there is any risk in the build process, that bugs in the logic of the program occur just in a subset of languages. If not the language does not matter and there is no need to translate und multiply the work with translating all the tests in more than 100 languages. Litmus becomes unusable and getting statistics gets much harder as you have to aggregate over all the languages. Also members that do not speak every language will have no chance to get information out of more than 80% of the tests and in the end when tests fail you have to use the english only bgzilla. But I guess the lang-projects insist on having translated tests, so whatever. Having even differing tests in all the languages just make the mess so much bigger. So even if we want translated tests please use a top down english -> rest approach. Regards, Michael -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to projects+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/projects/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-projects] QA manual test Litmus session on 3.3.3Rc
Hi Sophie, Am Sonntag, den 05.06.2011, 23:36 +0300 schrieb Sophie Gautier: > Hi all, > > *please, follow up on the projects list, thanks in advance* > > I would like to try to organize a first session of manual tests - > release scenarios - on Litmus [1]. Mostly to see how it goes and fine > tune what needs to be done to go further. We need to push our QA process > further and log what is done in the language community. > > The first version will 3.3.3 RC. Yifan (thanks a lot! ) did upload a > session for 3.4, but I guess we were a bit distracted by what happened > to the OOo code. But we can use this basis for the next session. Should a test run 3.3.3 already be visable? > Tests already exists in US - DE - FR, it's a first set that needs to be > improved and made available for all languages. Would a additional testgroup with those bugs that occured as blockers for past releases make sense at this early stage of the process? They should be easily found in the bugzilla. Another question, would tests against the daily builds of the 3.4 series go into the libreoffice 3.4 test run or should there just be tests against beta and/or RC versions? Regards, Michael -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to projects+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/projects/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-projects] status of release QA/Litmus
Hi all, as the 3.4.0 release is coming very soon I just opened Litmus again this morning and was a bit shocked that there is more or less nothing in there. Although there is some text about Litmus on http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA nobody seems to use it yet. So some questions, a) who is testing the RCs? Some work seems still to be done in the wiki [1],[2], although the amount of testers is pretty low. b) what are we doing with Litmus? Weeks and months pass by and the whole relase QA process looks like it is getting no momentum at all as opposed to most of the other parts in the LO community. My suggestion is bring Litmus to front. Even if it has some flaws and tests for just some parts and languages of the product open and announce it publicly and use it as the only tool to get content in it asap. If people create an account and see that there is really work going on in this tool they will stay and contribute more likely than at the moment. I could live without an release QA process as described in the wiki, dump Litmus and just work with the time based releases and blocker bugs in bugzilla as the release criteria. But one way or the other there needs to be some direction and decissions. Michael [1] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Manual_Tests [2] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Manual_Tests/3.4.0/de -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to projects+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/projects/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
