Hi all,
Thanks all your concern of future Moztrap!
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 08:00:37PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> Sophie Gautier píše v St 15. 08. 2012 v 14:29 +0200:
> > Hi Bjoern,
> > On 15/08/2012 13:00, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
> > > I fear manually translated testcases are doomed to fail as they will
> > > always be
> > > outdated/incomplete during the timeframe that matters. Using automatic
> > > translation (and tweaking the original so it comes out understandable)
> > > might
> > > work though. Automatic translation is by now mostly only a problem, if
> > > you dont
> > > control the source.
> >
> > Imho, that won't work for two reasons:
> > - behavior is not the same in every language and testing may differ/be
> > adapted depending on the local
Hi Bjoern,
It actually is a brilliant idea to make all the stuff automatically synced,
but in
practice it needs a lot of time to investigate and manual interference seems
inevitable. I am sharing my concern that we need to make Moztrap *fastly*
adapted to all QA people with very limited resource. And for sure we should
consider how the test case should currently organized for migrating to a
future
better solution (how automation translation plays a role here could be one of
the options).
What enlightens me that it should make sense to leverage automation
translation technique in Moztrap UI translation :)
> We had this discussion on Litmus times. We need to split the test cases
> into language independent and language specific groups. I think that
> most functionality is language independent and thus simple translation
> of the test case should be enough.
>
> The few language-specific test cases might need special handling.
Hi All,
Yes, this was the assumption.
For a language independent case, I tend to believe English version of it is
*must-to-have*, and all direct translation of test cases in different
languages is *prefer-to-have*.
For those language dependent test cases (only makes sense to test in French
locale for example), it makes sense to write in native language only. While an
English translation for it is still *better-to-have* since we want to share
information in the community. At least English speaking people could
understand what has been tested when reviewing and reusing the test.
In either of the case, it will not seem to break a workaround like:
http://vm12.documentfoundation.org/runtests/run/21/env/633/
or
http://vm12.documentfoundation.org/runtests/run/23/env/634/
Just wonder how do them look like to you?
> I think that we have to extend Moztrap to translate test cases and UI
> sooner or later. We need to find a temporary solution that will allow
> testers to work with it already now and allow to migrate the test cases
> to the translated framework later easily.
>
> > - UI strings are not the same due to localization, and we are also QAing
> > our l10n when we do those tests in our language
>
> I also think that we will get better results with our own localization.
> Most test cases should stay the same between few releases. I think that
> we could survive one or two years with inline translations. I hope that
> we could get real localization support within that timeframe.
I am for it.
> We are going to pay some external developers to improve bugzilla this
> year. I would imagine that we could get some money to improve Moztrap
> next year if we were not able to do it using our resources.
This is cheerful :)
--
Yifan Jiang
Libreoffice / SuSE
Contact: yifan - irc.freenode.net/libreoffice
=============================================
http://www.libreoffice.org/
http://www.documentfoundation.org/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
