Hey,
On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 6:33 PM Miklos Vajna wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The current practice is: if 'make check' passes (which is more or less
> enforced by Jenkins) and the change looks good to a reviewer, the change
> goes in. And then releases are based on time, so it's really rare that
> there
Le 07/03/2019 à 19:32, Markus Mohrhard a écrit :
> Most likely no. If we have tests for something it is more likely that it
> will be fixed after it is discovered by in the end an accessibility
> regression is similar to any other regression. That means that a test
> started failing you are
Hey,
let me at least add some comments.
On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 5:42 PM Jean-Philippe MENGUAL <
jean-philippe.meng...@libreoffice.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Le 06/03/2019 à 20:52, Samuel Thibault a écrit :
> > Hello,
> >
> > Markus Mohrhard, le lun. 25 févr. 2019 00:34:33 +0800, a ecrit:
> >> On a
Hi,
Le 06/03/2019 à 20:52, Samuel Thibault a écrit :
Hello,
Markus Mohrhard, le lun. 25 févr. 2019 00:34:33 +0800, a ecrit:
On a slightly related note I think that we have already quite a few tests for
the accessibility UNO layer but as that layer is full of bugs many of the tests
are
On Sun, 24 Feb 2019 at 22:04, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> The fact that even the C UI strings may change is a concern indeed. We
> however don't really have another way to identify widgets, do we? (we
> don't want to identify them structurally, that'd be even less stable)
>
>
The LibreOffice python
Hello Samuel,
let me add a few comments based on many years implementing testing
frameworks for LibreOffice and most recently working on the UI testing.
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 6:24 PM Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Noel Grandin, le sam. 23 févr. 2019 12:19:19 +0200, a ecrit:
> > However, the
So yes, the focus information would be fairly easy to expose to the python
UI test infrastructure.
And yes, it would be good to limit the number of different frameworks we
use for testing (we already have 4 - C++ direct, C++ via UNO, Java via UNO,
python via UNO)
However, the current python UI
