Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [libreoffice-l10n] L10n of Florian's Windows installer
Hi Florian, would it work if you got one CSV file for each language? Each file would contain three columns: Name | en-US string | target string If that would do, we wouldn't need any conversion at all to fill these files in Pootle, I believe. Rimas 2013.08.28 11:38, Florian Reisinger rašė: Hi all, It is okay for me, but I have not used Pootle a lot... For me it would be the best to give you a xls [I use a program to import them into the .resx file format] file and get one in return from time to time, or if I ask to... I hope that this is okay for all of you :) Am 28.08.2013 10:11, schrieb Sophie: Hi Chris, Florian, all, Le 28/08/2013 01:00, Chris Leonard a écrit : It would really help you manage translation workflow if you just posted the POT to the Pootle templates language. You can easily create a new project for this if you want it seperate from other projects. If this is spreadsheet based, using csv2po and po2csv might be needed. Taking into account the number of localizations we have now I think that would be the best for all of us. Florian, is it ok for you if we use Pootle to maintain the localization flow, this is where we are used to work for all the LibreOffice projects. Cheers Sophie ___ 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Moztrap OpenID support - go for testing!
Hi Yifan! 2012.10.11 12:43, Yi Fan Jiang rašė: I have brought OpenID to Moztrap this week, the following is the test page for login: http://vm12.documentfoundation.org/openid/login/ thats awesome! I will update the main login page to add openid support next weekend if no critical issue found. Functions currently supported (testing required) * Based on EMAIL address, native login/Mozilla Persona/OpenID are all mapped to the same user in Moztrap now, so they should be seamlessly worked together. Those details as follows. - If you have a native registered moztrap user or ever used Mozilla Persona to login, and your openid provides an exact same EMAIL of such an account, the original user and openid user will be treated exactly identical. Actually you should feel nothing changed except inputting password is no longer needed :) Great! Except here's a critical issue for you: I have just managed to log on to MozTrap as you!!! Here's the proof: http://i.imgur.com/eF0Cl.png . In case you're wondering how I did this: I logged on to my weblog, set my email in my profile to yfji...@suse.com, and used its OpenID provider to log in to the test website. Since I don't need to proove to my weblog or the demo site that the email is indeed mine, I basically have full control over MozTrap now. So, not a good thing. This needs some rethinking. Most obvious option would be to use the OpenID URL (or whatever it is that OpenID provides as the identifier) as id when logging in using OpenID. This would also have a nice side effect that the user could change their primary email, and still be able to log in with the same user id and permissions. Regards! Rimas ___ 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Reporting Ignorant User on FDO?
2012.09.13 08:32, Roman Eisele rašė: Am 12.09.12 09:34, schrieb David Tardon: I suggest to reply to any such comment of his by citing https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120107#c1 (the user name and email looks familiar, does it not? :-) This is a wonderful idea, both simple and elegant. My compliments! Wonderful, indeed! Rimas ___ 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Online update in 3.6
2012.08.03 11:37, klaus-jürgen weghorn ol rašė: Hi Jan, Am 03.08.2012 10:04, schrieb Jan Holesovsky: Fixed now, the update to RC4 should be offered. Thanks again for the testing! Works. Thanks. Hi, the update string is somewhat fuzzy though: for me it says I have 3.6.0.2 installed, and the update is 3.6.0 RC4. I know that the laste digit is the RC number, but still I think it would be nicer if same numbering scheme was used for both version numbers. Rimas ___ 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Investigating Caseconductor for next QA call
Hi Bjoern, 2012.03.30 15:17, Bjoern Michaelsen rašė: Hi Sophie, On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 12:05:24PM +0200, Sophie Gautier wrote: I'm not Pedro or Rimas, but I would have time to have a look for the end of next week. If you think I'm not enough skilled, no problem. That would be excellent! And if anything, you would be overskilled as my primary concern with Caseconductor so far is that it is to confusing/overengineered to attract people into easily contributing. So having a look at that would be most appreciated. I still would love to have Rimas have a look at Caseconductor too if possible, as he was having high hopes in it, that I dont want to simple brush away without a better look. Sorry, but I don't think I'll have enough time for proper investigation anytime soon (definitely not till the end of April). I fully trust Sophie though. I think she's the person who actually does some QA (as opposed to me), and she's definitely better organized than myself. :) I think Sophie has some contacts at Mozilla QA, perhaps they could brief her (and us, by extension) about working with CC? As for the high hopes – I think it's an overestimation. I've created myself an account in the test server, but just like you, I haven't figured out what I can do next, but then again, I didn't have much time to stare at it and click things either. CC *looks* drastically different than Litmus, maybe that's the culprit. Rimas ___ 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal
2012.03.22 01:00, Pedro rašė: Bjoern Michaelsen wrote Register mail just took a while. Which brings us to the original problem: why doesn't it support OpenID from the beginning? In a little over a month, AskLibO already has nearly 600 users. How much clearer does the message need to be? Mozilla plans to implement BrowserID in the tool: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org//show_bug.cgi?id=700751 . I don't think they would be willing to implement OpenID themselves, but I don't think they would try to sabotage anyone from doing so either. Rimas ___ 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Make use of your karma - feel free to retag/edit posts (Fwd: QA forum feedback)
2012.03.02 14:09, Christian Lohmaier rašė: On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Pedropedl...@gmail.com wrote: I never received a copy of my sent email (I assume you rejected my previous suggestion of enabling the form to send a copy to the author) Yes, I regard it as pointless. If you want a copy for your own records, send mail to the website list directly. After all it will reach the same group of people (+ a couple more) You receiving a copy will not prevent me from making mistakes when answering, so... When not receiving a reply, you need to resend/ping people anyway, no matter whether you did receive a copy or not. It is convenient to have a record of what you have suggested though. Receiving the message also means that the server really works. Plus, not everyone knows that askbot feedback is to be sent to the website list. So, I wouldn't regard it as pointless, and if enabling this feature is as easy as checking a box, I would enable it if I were you. Rimas ___ 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] manual testing
Hello, 2012.02.27 13:30, Pedro wrote: Sophie Gautier wrote No, Litmus is an online tool to manage manual test cases. -snip- It's really simple to use for the tester, he just has to reproduce what he is reading on the Litmus site into LibreOffice and then mark the test as passed, skip or failed, nothing more :) Yes, that was my understanding of Litmus. I don't know why you assume it's a Windows-only tool then. Don't you have a web browser in your other OS? :) One thing that could be done to make the Litmus site more user attractive would be to add an OpenID login option (like in the ask.libreoffice.org site) Personally I haven't tested Litmus because I really don't feel like registering to yet another site (I have already registered to three mailing lists, the Nabble site and the wiki) OpenID integration is a great idea indeed. I too hate to create separate logins for each website or service, and then end up with a bunch of different passwords I can't remember and/or a bunch of shared passwords that are insecure... I've added this suggestion to the TODO list (https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Litmus_TODO), but I can't promise I will be looking into it anytime soon. Litmus' source is available though, so I'd welcome contributions. ;) Regards, Rimas ___ 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Test case naming
Hi Petr, 2011.11.15 17:30, Petr Mladek rašė: Rimas Kudelis píše v Út 15. 11. 2011 v 13:43 +0200: Also, maybe I shouldn't look that far into future, but I hope that there will come a day when proper localization of testcases will be possible (that is, instead of creating a clone of testcase X in another language, we would actually be able to translate testcase X into that language). With that in mind, current testgroups (which represent different locales) would become unneeded. I am not sure if the l10n tests will be pure word-to-word translation. Some things are done completely different in different languages, for example the layout of the letter template, right-to-left language features, decimal number delimiter, dates. I am sure that some languages would need special tests. I didn't say they have to be translated word-to-word. They should be *localized*, and I would expect a localized testcase to suggest localized number and date formats and other stuff. RTL, on the other hand, might probably need a few additional testcases. Though not many, I would guess. BTW: How is the localization used during test run? It's not. It's just shown in the test results. I know that I select locale in the Run Tests - Your Chosen Test Run dialog, see https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Litmus/Litmus_User_Guide#Enter_Test_Configuration If I select de, will I see only the de test cases from the l10n branch? I am not sure if it is important but it would be nice. No, currently you will still see all testcases. My idea with localizable testcases though is pretty much about this. If testcase X was localized instead of duplicated, it would only be shown once, in user's preferred locale (I don't know yet how exactly the user would prefer that locale though and what a user who would want to test more than one locale would do). My suggestion is to have a single branch, but carry Priority, Locale and Component information in the Testgroup, and to represent test type by a subgroup. That is, what is now a branch, would become a subgroup, and everything else would become a testgroup (see the attached PDF file). Hmm, I am afraid that we would get too many testgroups. It produces 7 (General, Base, Calc, Draw, Impress, Math, Writer) testgroups for one language. We have 109 localizations in sources = we could end up with more than 700 test groups. Which I guess is not realistic, at least in the short term. ;) Right now we only have four languages into which testcases are translated. With 50, it's of course a different story, but with 4 to 10... it's probably still manageable enough. This allows to: * create testruns based on priority, locale, component, or any combination of these The question is what test runs we will want to create. * create a single catch-all testrun for a single version of LibO would be nice * share the same General Functional Tests subgroup between testgroups designated for different locales (that is, you would create this subgroup once, and add it to all locale groups) I am not sure what you mean with this. Could we share subgroups between test groups in Litmus? Is it clearly visible or is hard to maintain and see? Like I mentioned before, when you create/edit a testgroup, you can add the subgroups you want to it. So subgroups can be shared, yes. BTW: What do you mean with the Basis Functional Test? We do not have this subgroup in the current structure. Don't we? https://tcm.documentfoundation.org/manage_testgroups.cgi?testgroup_id=58 * drop 75% of the testgroups (there would be about 28 of them initially) if/when proper testcase localization is implemented, still not rendering the remaining testgroups useless. I am not sure if we really could drop them. Well, the question is if we need to split between lang-dependent and lang-independent on the top level. I don't think there are many lang-dependent testcases. Desired result may depend on the language, yes, but the testcase itself? Heh, it seems that it is quite complex problem. I am going to write another mail where I will try to summarize some ideas :-) Good luck with that. :) Rimas ___ 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Test case naming
On 2011.11.14 12:28, Petr Mladek wrote: Yifan Jiang píše v Ne 13. 11. 2011 v 18:46 +0800: For example: #EN - w001 xxx is supposed to have the same content with (but in different version of language): #FR - w001 xxx #DE - w001 xxx #pt-BR - w001 xxx These give us reasonable information showing which cases are supposed to be synced to each other (they may not have exact same steps of testing because of the diversity of language settings, but they should test the same areas). So for current testing organization, I think these ids are still playing their role in L10N test branches. Otherwise, syncing of cases could be painful. Ah, this makes sense. So, the number 001, 002, 003, 004 is a l10n test case number (something like bugzilla number). Would be enough to mention it in brackets at the end of the test case summary? I mean something like: p1 - test case summary (w#1,en) p1 - another test case summary (w#2,en) and localized p1 - test case summary (w#1,en) p1 - popis testu (w#1,cs) p1 - Testfall Zusammenfassung (w#1,cs) I know that it is not ideal because it wont be that easy to sort the test cases by the id and compare the list. On the other hand, syncing localized test cases will not be easy anyway. I think that the bug priority is more important sorting criteria Note that p1 #EN - w001 test case summary looks confusing to me. There are just too many identifiers in the prefix. And it does not help with sorting as well. P1 W01EN would be shorter. Still admittedly quite ugly though. Meanwhile in Function Regression testing branch, by the fact we are now using a single case to host all language versions of test case, it may not make sense to keep the id any more. Note the testcase still has its real id (used in the database). If needed, it could be made more visible. This way, it would look the same for function regression test and localization regression tests. The localization regression test will just have some extra identification in the brackets. Like you said, this would make different testcases harder to associate with each other. OTOH, I guess only the admins often see them all in the same place. I suggest to split test cases into several levels by priorities: Actually it is a great idea to have priority here, at least they are helpful for us to define subset of test runs. For example, we can create smoke test runs by select P1 only test cases when creating a test run from a full regression branch containing all cases. Exactly That is to say, even before we sort out how order of the test cases could be implemented, we can always create specific test runs on demand via the information of the priority tags. BTW: How do you suggest to create the priority tag? Is there any better solution than to put it into prefix of the test case summary? Well, as an alternative, branches/groups/subgroups could be reviewed again. :) Also, Litmus allows marking certain test runs as recommended and shows them on top. This means that separate P1 testruns could be created and promoted on Litmus homepage. Rimas ___ 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus problem in Chrome and IE.
2011.11.03 06:16, Yifan Jiang rašė: Hi Rimas, Would you help to look a bit of this bug found by occasion, though I am not sure if someone else also meets the same problems. The bug may cause most of IE and Chrome users cannot filter test cases with usually used UI. https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42541 It just reminds me to think about the new layout of test case selection box we did last week, which might be related? That was a pure css change. I don't see how it could be related. However, as I mentioned before, I updated Litmus from upstream last weak. That could be related. I'll take a look at this problem later. Thank you for your time and I appreciate your help :) You're welcome. :) Regards, Rimas ___ 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/
