I see no reason why we shouldn't have some kind of early warning system. It would even be possible to ping some talk pages hidden off in the ether from time to time.
We certainly did this at Lulu. If this search ever failed we would sound the claxons: http://www.lulu.com/shop/search.ep?type=&keyWords=test+book+xyzzu&x=0&y=0&sitesearch=lulu.com&q= We also bought a book every five minutes from off site with a fake but valid credit card. Our system ate the order right before sending it to the credit card processor so we could be pretty sure that most of the chain was still working. That feels like the right level of paranoia. Nik On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Chris McMahon <[email protected]> wrote: > > Open question: is it worthwhile to run read-only browser tests against the > production wiki, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org? > > At one point we thought a couple of sanity checks would be valuable in > production, but since then our deployment process that updates test2wiki > weekly may be be adequate for the purpose. > > Tests currently running in prod: > > PDF > Print export menu > PageTriage > Preferences > > _______________________________________________ > QA mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/qa > _______________________________________________ QA mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/qa
