Hans, I stand corrected, in this case JEDES is a better translation for ANY. And make FAILURE FEHLER. Regards Mirko -- http://illegalstateexception.blogspot.com/ https://github.com/mfriedenhagen/ (http://osrc.dfm.io/mfriedenhagen) https://bitbucket.org/mfriedenhagen/
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Hans Schwäbli <bugs.need.love....@gmail.com> wrote: > Mirko, I suppose you are a native German speaker like me, right? > > What is your message? That the current German translations for ANY and > FAILURE are the best? > > Lets put it in the context: > > * Ergebnis: IRGENDWELCHE > * Ergebnis: BELIEBIGES > * Ergebnis: JEDES > > Did you try that feature? You should really try and see how it behaves I > think. > > To me "Ergebnis: IRGENDWELCHE" it sounds unnatural. One can understand with > a bit thought what that might mean. But it seems not so intuitive like the > English word ANY. > > "Ergebnis: JEDES" seems to express the correct meaning and is easy to > understand. Because whatever the result is, the steps in that block will be > added before or after the scenario. In German: In *jedem* Fall werden > Schritte vor oder nach dem Szenario hinzugefügt. > > Or concerning BELIEBIGES: Bei einem *beliebigen* Testergebnis werden > Schritte vor oder nach dem Szenario hinzugefügt. Sound natural and easy to > understand to me. > > But IRGENDWELCHE? Bei *irgendwelchen* Testergebnissen werden Schritte vor > oder nach dem Szenario hinzugefügt? This sounds very strange to me. > > Concerning ISTQB, this is the definition of a failure: > Deviation of the component or system from its expected delivery, service or > result. > See: http://www.istqb.org/downloads/viewcategory/20.html > > Failures is translated by ISTQB as "Fehlerwirkungen". > See: http://www.software-tester.ch/PDF-Files/CT_Glossar_EN_DE_V22.pdf > > So it is not "Ausfall". You may say it is also not "Fehler". But > "Fehlerwirkung is an artificial word originating from ISTQB. Noone I ever > met (except ISTQB teachers) ever uses this word but instead says "Fehler". > > By the way, defect is translated as Fehlerzustand by ISTQB. This is also an > artificial word which noone uses except ISTQB teachers. In Germany we call > them: Bugs or simply Fehler, or much more academically and very seldom: > Defekt. > > Besides that, ISTQB, although helpful to some degree in its basic teachings, > I consider it to be non-agile in its full extent. I take only the good from > it. > > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Mauro Talevi <mauro.tal...@aquilonia.org> > wrote: >> >> So, what's the consensus then with the keywords? >> >> On 16/05/2014 18:42, Mauro Talevi wrote: >> >> I'll defer to whatever you guys decide is best. We can always change it >> later. >> >> On 15/05/2014 18:27, Mirko Friedenhagen wrote: >> >> Hans, >> >> I am not sure I agree :-). JEDES would be EVERY IMO. >> >> According to ISTQB FEHLER would be the DEFECT which causes a FAILURE >> (FEHLSCHLAG), which may lead to an AUSFALL (BREAKDOWN) of a server ;-) >> >> Am 15.05.2014 12:34 schrieb "Hans Schwäbli" >> <bugs.need.love....@gmail.com>: >>> >>> I re-tested it and now it works. Thank you! >>> >>> However I did not use that feature in-depth so there might be some other >>> isues. >>> >>> I wondered a bit about outcome ANY. It seems to be like the finally-block >>> in Java. The German translation IRGENDWELCHE is maybe not the best for ANY. >>> Ergebnis: "BELIEBIGES" or "JEDES" seems to be better to me. >>> >>> And Ergebnis: "AUSFALL" seems not to be the best translation too. I think >>> better would be Ergebnis "FEHLER". >>> >>> Maybe some other German speaking guys can share their opinions about a >>> translation for ANY and FAILURE? >>> >>> >>> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:08 AM, Mauro Talevi >>> <mauro.tal...@aquilonia.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> There was an issue with parsing with non-EN locales. Now fixed, try >>>> again with latest head. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 14/05/2014 17:35, Hans Schwäbli wrote: >>>> >>>> I quickly tested the lifecycle. >>>> >>>> Story: >>>> >>>> Lebenszyklus: >>>> Vorher: >>>> Gegeben im Lager sind 100 T-Shirts >>>> Nach: >>>> Ergebnis: ERFOLG >>>> Gegeben im Lager sind 200 T-Shirts >>>> Ergebnis: IRGENDWELCHE >>>> Gegeben im Lager sind 300 T-Shirts >>>> Ergebnis: AUSFALL >>>> Gegeben im Lager sind 400 T-Shirts >>>> Szenario: Versandkosten fallen weg >>>> Wenn ein Kunde 20 T-Shirts bestellt >>>> Dann betragen die Versandkosten 7,5 Euro >>>> Result is: >>>> >>>> Lebenszyklus: >>>> Vorher: >>>> Gegeben im Lager sind 100 T-Shirts >>>> Nach: >>>> Ergebnis: IRGENDWELCHE >>>> Gegeben im Lager sind 200 T-Shirts >>>> Gegeben im Lager sind 300 T-Shirts >>>> Gegeben im Lager sind 400 T-Shirts >>>> >>>> Szenario: Versandkosten fallen weg >>>> Gegeben im Lager sind 100 T-Shirts >>>> Wenn ein Kunde 20 T-Shirts bestellt >>>> Dann betragen die Versandkosten 7,5 Euro >>>> Gegeben im Lager sind 200 T-Shirts >>>> Gegeben im Lager sind 300 T-Shirts >>>> Gegeben im Lager sind 400 T-Shirts >>>> >>>> It does not work as I expect it since it executes all three after steps >>>> although it should only execute the one for "Ergebnis: ERFOLG" (Outcome: >>>> SUCCESS). >>>> >>>> On Friday or next week I can test that a bit more thoroughly. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Mauro Talevi >>>> <mauro.tal...@aquilonia.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Cool, we'll push out new beta soon. >>>>> >>>>> Can you also take the Lifecycle After upon outcome functionality for a >>>>> spin while you're at it? >>>>> >>>>> On 13/05/2014 13:42, Hans Schwäbli wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I mixed up snapshot versions with beta-versions, sorry. >>>>> >>>>> I tried now the snapshot version and it works now as expected >>>>> concerning the problem with the examples table. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you! >>>>> >>>>> But there is a problem with comments. I will write a posting just on >>>>> that. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Mauro Talevi >>>>> <mauro.tal...@aquilonia.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> No, a new beta has not been deployed yet. In the meantime, you can >>>>>> use the latest 3.9.x or build the 4.0 snapshot from source. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 8 May 2014, at 08:59, Hans Schwäbli <bugs.need.love....@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you! Is it also deployed? >>>>>> I did not find it here: >>>>>> https://nexus.codehaus.org/content/groups/public/org/jbehave/jbehave-core/4.0-beta-7/ >>>>>> The last snapshot there is from 2nd of May. >>>>>> The same snapshot date is on: >>>>>> http://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.jbehave/jbehave-maven-plugin/4.0-beta-7/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 11:25 PM, Mauro Talevi >>>>>> <mauro.tal...@aquilonia.org> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This issue is now fixed in head of 4.x branch. It did not apply to >>>>>>> 3.x. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 07/05/2014 10:55, Hans Schwäbli wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I created such an example for jbehave-core now and attached it to >>>>>>> this posting. I still cannot work on a clone the Github project because >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> company restrictions (I haven't yet received an answer why it is not >>>>>>> working >>>>>>> inside the company proxy). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In case the mailing list does not support attachments I have also >>>>>>> sent them directly to Mauro. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To reproduce it you will need this in the Maven pom.xml: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <metaFilters> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <metaFilter>+component order -skip</metaFilter> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> </metaFilters> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Hans Schwäbli >>>>>>> <bugs.need.love....@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I committed it here: >>>>>>>> https://github.com/OttoDiesel/jbehave-shop-example.git >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I will add such a scenario to the core examples. Until then you >>>>>>>> could use that other example if you like. It is the example for the >>>>>>>> article >>>>>>>> on JBehave by the way. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 3:04 PM, Mauro Talevi >>>>>>>> <mauro.tal...@aquilonia.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yes, it looks likely to be unrelated to given stories and such. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Could you please add a scenario reproducing the behaviour to the >>>>>>>>> meta_filtering.story in the core examples (preferably in English)? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Does it work with 3.x? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 06/05/2014 11:34, Hans Schwäbli wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I already use StoryControls.doIgnoreMetaFiltersIfGivenStory(true). >>>>>>>>> And I removed the given story in the story. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> But the result is the same. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Maybe tomorrow I can commit the whole project, so that you can >>>>>>>>> reproduce it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Stephen de Vries >>>>>>>>> <stephe...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 6 May 2014, at 10:51, Hans Schwäbli >>>>>>>>>> <bugs.need.love....@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I have the example story, see below. It runs not as expected when >>>>>>>>>> filtering by: +Komponente Bestellung -Skip >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> VorgegebeneStories: >>>>>>>>>> shop/stories/Login.story >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> My guess is that the given story doesn’t have the same meta-tags. >>>>>>>>>> Fix is to set: StoryControls.doIgnoreMetaFiltersIfGivenStory(true) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> See: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JBEHAVE-789 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
