On 2/27/13, Branko Čibej <[email protected]> wrote: > On 27.02.2013 13:01, Olemis Lang wrote: >> On 2/27/13, Jure Zitnik <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On 2/22/13 4:34 PM, Olemis Lang wrote: >>>> On 2/22/13, Branko Čibej <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> [...] >>>>> P.S.: By the way, do we test upgrades from Trac to BH? If not, why >>>>> not? >>>>> :) >>>>> >>>> We should . >>> +1 >>> >>> It'd be really helpful if we could get hold of a real trac database to >>> perform tests on. Anyone got access to a database snapshot that we could >>> use for testing? >>> >> Ideally I'd advocate for writing unit and/or functional tests for MP >> upgrades . > > Yes, but you'll never invent tests that reproduce real-world cases > without looking at real-world cases in the first place. >
That's what I'd call functional tests . Trac test suite includes some of them in which a whole environment is created once then shared among TCs in a test fixture and invoke the whole Trac machinery using twill to trigger web processing in-process . They'd be close to what u'd get with manual testing ... with the added benefit of automation e.g. track regressions . They'd be a sort of «robot» using Bloodhound in well-known , predefined manner and checking for expected behavior based on system output. Having real env data at the beginning is addressed by test fixtures . BTW , this kind of automation is not an urgent matter , so think of my comments to be a suggestion to adopt in the long-run PS: Testing approaches will never be perfect ... but may be quite similar to reality -- Regards, Olemis.
