When will there be a beta-8 version of the 4.x branch containing this fix?
I am asking because the examples for the JBehave article will need
that, and the magazine is published on 2nd of July.
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Mauro Talevi
<mauro.tal...@aquilonia.org <mailto:mauro.tal...@aquilonia.org>> wrote:
Sold! To the German-speaking gentleman at the back of the room :-)
On 20/05/2014 21:00, Mirko Friedenhagen wrote:
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
<mailto: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
<mailto: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
<mailto: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
<mailto: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
<mailto: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
<mailto: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
<mailto: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
<mailto: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
<mailto: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
<mailto: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
<mailto:stephe...@gmail.com>>
wrote:
On 6 May 2014, at
10:51, Hans Schwäbli
<bugs.need.love....@gmail.com
<mailto: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
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
