steve [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2012-09-26 📝 Original message:-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED ...
📅 Original date posted:2012-09-26
📝 Original message:-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 26/09/2012 13:49, Wladimir wrote:
> Steve,
Hi Wladimir,
>
>> So, currently there are 4 potential places for bugs to be
>> reported 1 - jenkins (and unit tests) 2 - git 3 - mailing list 4
>> - forum (bitcointalk...) 5? - is there still the ability to add
>> bugs via sourceforge?
>
> Currently github is the authoritative place to report issues. When
> someone reports a bug on the mailing list, IRC or forum, they are
> generally asked to make a github issue (or, someone else makes the
> issue for them). Failed tests are generally also reported on
> github, by the pull tester.
excellent, that makes things much easier.
>
> We currently have 232 issues, mostly classified into categories
> such as "Bug", "Improvement", "GUI", "Wallet", and so on.
>
> Also it's easy to refer to github issues in commits with #123, with
> automatic linking.
>
> I'm not sure it is worth the effort to move to another system
> (especially if you need a another login etc...). But I'm probably
> misunderstanding what you're trying to do.
I think you might be misunderstanding a little. I am not trying to
replace the current system, I need to make sure that what I do will be
compatible with it (seamlessly so for the developer). I do not want this
to generate extra work for the development team.
However testing is a lot more than just bug reporting, dont get me
wrong bug reports are important, but so is running a testcase and that
testcase passing, especially if that testcase is linked to the proof
of a requirement. I am trying to develop a qa environment that is
conducive to testing and will allow the testers to shine in all their
glory :) and we need different tools and methodologies.
Git is too developer centric to be useful for organising testing. -
however there is a large amount of software that is compatible with
git, so the core development team only ever need to work with git.
The linking between a bug, the requirement, the fix, the retest, and
updating of regression testplan is vital. So is the ability to
organise testing campaigns and assigning tests, work units and test
relevant docs/scripts/ideas, etc.
I hope this clears things up a bit?
Cheers,
steve
>
> Wladimir
>
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQYwESAAoJEFvEB9dQFvtQ/GUH/jv2c5L0OcL/kHkX/z0Yqbl/
2IntPLdjXNKLuz0A7BMz7XfUyVmWlZrw44qxmi+Vyk5PKNBjYIidm763xHnTeJLN
ULQBckYexMvan9hAyYZUOt85IpesdNgqTIsqh8f49y4roHOy8GT4M/2fhzXpnsGg
G9d2m8jWGpj/kxl9qE7/WjVQC4APwBi/NiJsCrcHswgweN+zENc/Pot9YBLxAZu/
ACBUX/xFymRdaZN8P2LWBXuKx6E2WEcBdPCCWArX07wPiBlrashx9Gz6tiNzIiNq
x2c4ltLzRa45AmiDtQhwqyTprz/DbyeAYO1sIsfpUxDeu9e3xTb/Zd96jfKIWI0=
=iHI1
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQYwGsAAoJEFvEB9dQFvtQxOsIAKgBBOKHNFtoV2cN+GVqzlip
yy0qiMvMTZKrraOhEw8QNNuOlB3LRchi+RDR/PvQkVfuwi/jHB2gUBzlapLoECBv
EH8pgT/MO281pXzARgRSVkRYqkb3ljhQz3mEQg9RhR9h5t9g2mL3Tvppt7249Bg8
oGXPj6xmMcrbClF5qDbwQUUDGJfOo4eti0jSVD3qp2NE7QpPVQwuN5buchpoKt3P
9aJnjeZdLmuAk2RPoDaLXUFc9unT8AcnW96juD0zoVA9wKvAa6/8IZQf0mzV4iZP
yiWGNOQtBZ+jyu2ixiEnvHqqG2ZmjtUVqWtjHkxYgrCyuuK2jOcTMNEWfn7SfKc=
=yP7N
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
📝 Original message:-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 26/09/2012 13:49, Wladimir wrote:
> Steve,
Hi Wladimir,
>
>> So, currently there are 4 potential places for bugs to be
>> reported 1 - jenkins (and unit tests) 2 - git 3 - mailing list 4
>> - forum (bitcointalk...) 5? - is there still the ability to add
>> bugs via sourceforge?
>
> Currently github is the authoritative place to report issues. When
> someone reports a bug on the mailing list, IRC or forum, they are
> generally asked to make a github issue (or, someone else makes the
> issue for them). Failed tests are generally also reported on
> github, by the pull tester.
excellent, that makes things much easier.
>
> We currently have 232 issues, mostly classified into categories
> such as "Bug", "Improvement", "GUI", "Wallet", and so on.
>
> Also it's easy to refer to github issues in commits with #123, with
> automatic linking.
>
> I'm not sure it is worth the effort to move to another system
> (especially if you need a another login etc...). But I'm probably
> misunderstanding what you're trying to do.
I think you might be misunderstanding a little. I am not trying to
replace the current system, I need to make sure that what I do will be
compatible with it (seamlessly so for the developer). I do not want this
to generate extra work for the development team.
However testing is a lot more than just bug reporting, dont get me
wrong bug reports are important, but so is running a testcase and that
testcase passing, especially if that testcase is linked to the proof
of a requirement. I am trying to develop a qa environment that is
conducive to testing and will allow the testers to shine in all their
glory :) and we need different tools and methodologies.
Git is too developer centric to be useful for organising testing. -
however there is a large amount of software that is compatible with
git, so the core development team only ever need to work with git.
The linking between a bug, the requirement, the fix, the retest, and
updating of regression testplan is vital. So is the ability to
organise testing campaigns and assigning tests, work units and test
relevant docs/scripts/ideas, etc.
I hope this clears things up a bit?
Cheers,
steve
>
> Wladimir
>
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQYwESAAoJEFvEB9dQFvtQ/GUH/jv2c5L0OcL/kHkX/z0Yqbl/
2IntPLdjXNKLuz0A7BMz7XfUyVmWlZrw44qxmi+Vyk5PKNBjYIidm763xHnTeJLN
ULQBckYexMvan9hAyYZUOt85IpesdNgqTIsqh8f49y4roHOy8GT4M/2fhzXpnsGg
G9d2m8jWGpj/kxl9qE7/WjVQC4APwBi/NiJsCrcHswgweN+zENc/Pot9YBLxAZu/
ACBUX/xFymRdaZN8P2LWBXuKx6E2WEcBdPCCWArX07wPiBlrashx9Gz6tiNzIiNq
x2c4ltLzRa45AmiDtQhwqyTprz/DbyeAYO1sIsfpUxDeu9e3xTb/Zd96jfKIWI0=
=iHI1
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQYwGsAAoJEFvEB9dQFvtQxOsIAKgBBOKHNFtoV2cN+GVqzlip
yy0qiMvMTZKrraOhEw8QNNuOlB3LRchi+RDR/PvQkVfuwi/jHB2gUBzlapLoECBv
EH8pgT/MO281pXzARgRSVkRYqkb3ljhQz3mEQg9RhR9h5t9g2mL3Tvppt7249Bg8
oGXPj6xmMcrbClF5qDbwQUUDGJfOo4eti0jSVD3qp2NE7QpPVQwuN5buchpoKt3P
9aJnjeZdLmuAk2RPoDaLXUFc9unT8AcnW96juD0zoVA9wKvAa6/8IZQf0mzV4iZP
yiWGNOQtBZ+jyu2ixiEnvHqqG2ZmjtUVqWtjHkxYgrCyuuK2jOcTMNEWfn7SfKc=
=yP7N
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----