Re: [Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management

2011-01-07 Thread Fedora QA
#152: Test Cases Management
--+-
  Reporter:  rhe  |   Owner:  rhe  
  Type:  enhancement  |  Status:  new  
  Priority:  major|   Milestone:  Fedora 15
 Component:  Wiki | Version:   
Resolution:   |Keywords:  retrospective
--+-
Comment (by rhe):

 [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Rhe/tcms_Comparison wiki vs nitrate page]
 is updated again. Last time there were some unknown fields in nitrate
 side. By doing some tests on it, I verified several of them and added some
 new features. Please refer to it. So far, I think the general use cases
 have been covered and converted to related features for comparison.

-- 
Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/152#comment:15
Fedora QA http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test


Re: [Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management

2011-01-05 Thread Fedora QA
#152: Test Cases Management
--+-
  Reporter:  rhe  |   Owner:  rhe  
  Type:  enhancement  |  Status:  new  
  Priority:  major|   Milestone:  Fedora 15
 Component:  Wiki | Version:   
Resolution:   |Keywords:  retrospective
--+-
Comment (by rhe):

 Replying to [comment:13 xcieja]:
  After familiarize myself with above comparison, better fits to my own
 preferences Wiki.
  It seems there are more useful features, sometimes not availible
 directly but via plugins, even though it looks more user friendly.
 
  My score: 1:0 for Wiki
 

 Hehe, thanks for voting for wiki. Note that the comparison is based on the
 use cases on wiki, so most of the compared features so far are already
 contained in the wiki and that's why the green fields in the wiki side are
 more than the nitrate side. But with deeper research on Nitrate TCMS, I'll
 find more features/advantages in it and add more features for comparison.
 Also, the red fields in Nitrate side are not permanent, they can be
 resolved by the tcms team if we decide those features as MUST-HAVE.

-- 
Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/152#comment:14
Fedora QA http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test


Re: [Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management

2011-01-03 Thread Fedora QA
#152: Test Cases Management
--+-
  Reporter:  rhe  |   Owner:  rhe  
  Type:  enhancement  |  Status:  new  
  Priority:  major|   Milestone:  Fedora 15
 Component:  Wiki | Version:   
Resolution:   |Keywords:  retrospective
--+-
Comment (by xcieja):

 Hi,
 I have few questions regarding to red fields by Wiki side:
 1) '''Review status - manually add reviewer''' -does it mean that if
 create test case and perform it, thereafter i want to allow others to see
 the result i need to add particulars users to list in order to give
 them rigths to see the status ???

 2) '''Result summary/report - -''' -is it not possible at all to
 generate the report ???

-- 
Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/152#comment:11
Fedora QA http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test


Re: [Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management

2010-12-30 Thread Fedora QA
#152: Test Cases Management
--+-
  Reporter:  rhe  |   Owner:  rhe  
  Type:  enhancement  |  Status:  new  
  Priority:  major|   Milestone:  Fedora 15
 Component:  Wiki | Version:   
Resolution:   |Keywords:  retrospective
--+-
Comment (by rhe):

 I further updated the use cases page:

  - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Rhe/tcms_use_cases

 And based on these, the use cases between the two tcms are compared in the
 link below:

  - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Rhe/tcms_Comparison

 Feel free to add comments. Thanks!

-- 
Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/152#comment:10
Fedora QA http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test


Re: [Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management

2010-12-25 Thread Fedora QA
#152: Test Cases Management
--+-
  Reporter:  rhe  |   Owner:  rhe  
  Type:  enhancement  |  Status:  new  
  Priority:  major|   Milestone:  Fedora 15
 Component:  Wiki | Version:   
Resolution:   |Keywords:  retrospective
--+-
Comment (by rhe):

 Replying to [comment:6 xcieja]:
  Hi,
  I have found following
 
table:[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Johannbg/Draft/QA/Test_Days/Features/EXT4].
  In my opinion it can serve as draft of functionality we would like to
 have or we should have. Obviously i would add to the table additional
 column and introduced a rule that each test case has to have corresponding
 name like : Netoworking 1, Networking 2 and so on...
 
  Now, i think the question is if we can do it via Wiki or TCMS.

 Do you mean
 
[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_talk:Johannbg/Draft/QA/Test_Days/Features/EXT4
 this example]? AFAIK, for wiki, one have to manually rename the page link
 when needed. For Nitrate TCMS, you can use 'alias' and 'tag' attitude of
 each test case to correspond them.

-- 
Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/152#comment:7
Fedora QA http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test


Re: [Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management

2010-12-25 Thread Fedora QA
#152: Test Cases Management
--+-
  Reporter:  rhe  |   Owner:  rhe  
  Type:  enhancement  |  Status:  new  
  Priority:  major|   Milestone:  Fedora 15
 Component:  Wiki | Version:   
Resolution:   |Keywords:  retrospective
--+-
Comment (by adamwill):

 Replying to [comment:6 xcieja]:
  Hi,
  I have found following
 
table:[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Johannbg/Draft/QA/Test_Days/Features/EXT4].
  In my opinion it can serve as draft of functionality we would like to
 have or we should have. Obviously i would add to the table additional
 column and introduced a rule that each test case has to have corresponding
 name like : Netoworking 1, Networking 2 and so on...
 
  Now, i think the question is if we can do it via Wiki or TCMS.

 Of course we can do it via the Wiki, as that example is done using the
 Wiki =) we already use a similar table format for test case results for
 most test days, and the validation testing. The drawbacks of using the
 wiki to track results are mostly in cleanliness (it's too free-form so
 users can mess up the tables), consistency (we don't really store all the
 results for any given test case in one place, instead we store results for
 *some particular event* which referenced those test cases), flexibility
 (see what rhe wrote) and comprehensiveness (a more sophisticated system
 could probably include more detail for each result, perhaps automatically
 retrieved from the user).

-- 
Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/152#comment:9
Fedora QA http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test


Re: [Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management

2010-12-25 Thread Fedora QA
#152: Test Cases Management
--+-
  Reporter:  rhe  |   Owner:  rhe  
  Type:  enhancement  |  Status:  new  
  Priority:  major|   Milestone:  Fedora 15
 Component:  Wiki | Version:   
Resolution:   |Keywords:  retrospective
--+-
Comment (by rhe):

 The [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Rhe/tcms_requirements_proposal
 proposal page] has been updated and written in the table format.

 To further identify this issue, the following items will be analysed in
 details one by one:

  - Identify our current test workflows (or use cases)
  - Identify problems with our current system and workflows - e.g.
 what would we like to do but are difficult/impossible with wiki
  - Objectively compare feature sets of both tools in relation to
 the important workflows
  - Identify+prioritize any feature gaps we'd need from nitrate in
 order to make a smooth transition
  - Document a plan/roadmap for the transition

 Where each item will be documented in a separate page, and the use cases
 page for the 1st one has been drafted:

  - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Rhe/tcms_use_cases

 Feel free to add comments or tell some uncovered use cases. Thanks.

-- 
Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/152#comment:8
Fedora QA http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test


Re: [Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management

2010-12-23 Thread Fedora QA
#152: Test Cases Management
--+-
  Reporter:  rhe  |   Owner:  rhe  
  Type:  enhancement  |  Status:  new  
  Priority:  major|   Milestone:  Fedora 15
 Component:  Wiki | Version:   
Resolution:   |Keywords:  retrospective
--+-
Comment (by xcieja):

 Hi,
 I have found following
 
table:[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Johannbg/Draft/QA/Test_Days/Features/EXT4].
 In my opinion it can serve as draft of functionality we would like to have
 or we should have. Obviously i would add to the table additional column
 and introduced a rule that each test case has to have corresponding name
 like : Netoworking 1, Networking 2 and so on...

 Now, i think the question is if we can do it via Wiki or TCMS.

-- 
Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/152#comment:6
Fedora QA http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test


Re: [Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management

2010-12-12 Thread Fedora QA
#152: Test Cases Management
--+-
  Reporter:  rhe  |   Owner:  rhe  
  Type:  enhancement  |  Status:  new  
  Priority:  major|   Milestone:  Fedora 15
 Component:  Wiki | Version:   
Resolution:   |Keywords:  retrospective
--+-
Comment (by rhe):

 Replying to [comment:4 aalam]:
  TCMS is really good idea for Test Creation and Manage Test plan than
 wiki.
 
  Is it necessary to have permission other than view for anonymous user,
 like Translation team allow only FAS account user to translation on
 http://translate.fedoraproject.org?

 I personally consider it as a NICE-TO-HAVE, since it's one big advantage
 for wiki-based system to allow anonymous user editing pages with certain
 name space, like 'test day:' and 'Test_Results:'. So far the nitrate
 system only has read permission for anonymous user, but this can be
 customized if we review the requirement and decide to use it.

-- 
Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/152#comment:5
Fedora QA http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test


Re: [Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management

2010-12-07 Thread James Laska
On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 23:33 +0100, Karol Cieśla wrote:
 Hi,
 i agree with both of you ,so that rather than just sending e-mails i
 would like initiate something which could improve the current
 situation.
 
 So the steps I see now look as follows:
 I stage
 1) someone could sketch out/outline/describe the functionality of
 Wiki/TCMS we would like to have for the test cases (if possible also
 provide graphical form) -i.e table, page, buttons

Hurry and I discussed this topic yesterday on IRC.  I suspect she'll
take a similar approach, but the general idea will be to first identify
what our QA community needs are when it comes to test
documentation/results.  For example, what works well, what isn't working
well, where do we want to improve when it comes to our current test
management.

 2) discuss with the whole community such form -pros,cons

As always, I expect the process will be transparent and there will be
plenty of opportunity for anyone interested to get involved and help
move things forward.

 3) reach out to people maintaining the Wiki and ask them if they can
 create such form wit help of Wiki/TCMS and can sustain bigger number
 of test cases (i.e up to 300)

If the analysis shows that investing in wiki-based solution is the most
sustainable option forward, there are several solutions available
(http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Semantic_Forms and possibly
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:StructuredInput).  My impression
with Semantic was that while it may scratch the wiki form-input itch for
us, it's certainly not without a startup cost and I'm still unclear
whether that's the right tool for the job.  It's a fun experiment, but
without knowing what where our current gaps are, and where we want to
improve, it's hard to make a decision to invest in semantic-mediawiki
over another actively maintained upstream project.

 II stage
 
 To ponder as the whole community the process of
 adding/creating/deleting/marking/prioritizing  test cases.

While it would be an interesting discussion, I don't know if we'd be
able to move forward with actionable work after a general community
ponder session.  I'd fear that would revolve too much around ponies [1].
I'm inclined to put emphasis on reviewing what we're doing now,
understand why we're doing it, document the pro's con's and prioritize
the MUSTHAVE features.

 P.S -i can try to prepare for the middle of the next week some draft
 to point 1 -it will be something simple but reflecting the idea.

Always welcome additional hands to help move the discussion forward!

Thanks,
James

 W dniu 2010-12-03 17:36, James Laska pisze: 
  Just a few extra thoughts on the subject ...
  
  On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 07:30 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
   On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 16:06 +0100, xcieja wrote:
Hi,
yes, you are right there are tests, but in my opinion they are in few 
different places under different  categories.
   That wasn't what I meant: I meant we already use the Wiki for the
   purposes you identified as an advantage of a TCMS (listing the tests
   that need to be performed in relation to some specific process, and
   whether they have already been performed, by whom, and with which
   result).
   
I think we could organise them better -i.e create test category and put 
all of them instead of many places.
   We sure could, but we don't necessarily need a TCMS to do this. :) Note
   that we do try to keep them all within one Wiki namespace and we do use
   Wiki categories to organize some test cases.
   
Moreover, i just have taken a look briefly and i see there are round 
100 
test cases in total (please correct me if i am wrong).I think that for 
such project/system it is not enough at all.

We have big community, let`s assume everyone from QA create one test, 
we 
will have quite huge number of tests and obviously more faults detected 
before main release, less corrections after=better 
stability,usability- 
better overall opinion.
   Sure, we can always do with more test cases.
  More test cases/plans would certainly change the conversation a bit.  I
  think we all want to increase the value that the Fedora QA team can
  offer to the project.  One way to increase our value is by improving our
  test coverage by way of test documentation (procedures, plans and
  cases).  There are plenty of other ways ... but we can save those for
  other threads.
  
  I've always been hesitant to add tests for the sake of adding tests.
  Test plans/cases are just like software.  If the tests aren't addressing
  a priority issue, they won't be used as much, and like unused software,
  will suffer from bit rot.  The best test cases/plans are the ones
  frequently used, referenced and have maintainer buy-in.  Meaning, if the
  tests fail, the maintainer cares.  I want to grow the library of tests
  we maintain and run, but hopefully grow in a manner and pace that we, as
  a community, can sustain.
  
  

Re: Re: Re: [Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management

2010-12-03 Thread xcieja
Hi,
yes, you are right there are tests, but in my opinion they are in few 
different places under different  categories.
I think we could organise them better -i.e create test category and put 
all of them instead of many places.

Moreover, i just have taken a look briefly and i see there are round 100 
test cases in total (please correct me if i am wrong).I think that for 
such project/system it is not enough at all.

We have big community, let`s assume everyone from QA create one test, we 
will have quite huge number of tests and obviously more faults detected 
before main release, less corrections after=better stability,usability- 
better overall opinion.


Please don`t get me wrong -if it works  fine like now i don`t want to 
create something new.Please treat as as comments of newcomer in the project.

Regards,
Karol
W dniu 20:59, Adam Williamson pisze:
 On Thu, 2010-12-02 at 23:12 +0100, xcieja wrote:
 Hi,
 i can say i am new to Fedora in general as project but i have
 participated in many testing campaigns professionaly, so honestly i see
 this TCMS(?) or any other way to organise test cases as big add value.

 It would be really great if we had a list of test cases for whole system
 (of course everyone can contibute) and mark each of them as
 successful/failed, track the status etc...

 The one of the advantages is that i am looking at such list of test
 cases and i am able to easily figure out what has been already tested
 and wht remaining is.

 If have missed something and such 'thing exists please correct me an
 forget the idea, otherwise what do you think ??
 We already do this, for most of our programmed testing, via the Wiki,
 using matrices. See:

 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test
 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Installation_Test

 for instance.
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test


Re: Re: Re: [Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management

2010-12-03 Thread Adam Williamson
On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 16:06 +0100, xcieja wrote:
 Hi,
 yes, you are right there are tests, but in my opinion they are in few 
 different places under different  categories.

That wasn't what I meant: I meant we already use the Wiki for the
purposes you identified as an advantage of a TCMS (listing the tests
that need to be performed in relation to some specific process, and
whether they have already been performed, by whom, and with which
result).

 I think we could organise them better -i.e create test category and put 
 all of them instead of many places.

We sure could, but we don't necessarily need a TCMS to do this. :) Note
that we do try to keep them all within one Wiki namespace and we do use
Wiki categories to organize some test cases.

 Moreover, i just have taken a look briefly and i see there are round 100 
 test cases in total (please correct me if i am wrong).I think that for 
 such project/system it is not enough at all.
 
 We have big community, let`s assume everyone from QA create one test, we 
 will have quite huge number of tests and obviously more faults detected 
 before main release, less corrections after=better stability,usability- 
 better overall opinion.

Sure, we can always do with more test cases.

 Please don`t get me wrong -if it works  fine like now i don`t want to 
 create something new.Please treat as as comments of newcomer in the project.

Not at all :)
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test


Re: [Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management

2010-12-03 Thread Karol Cieśla

Hi,
i agree with both of you ,so that rather than just sending e-mails i 
would like initiate something which could improve the current situation.


So the steps I see now look as follows:
*I stage*
_1)_ someone could sketch out/outline/describe the functionality of 
Wiki/TCMS we would like to have for the test cases (if possible also 
provide graphical form) -i.e table, page, buttons

_2)_ discuss with the whole community such form -pros,cons
_3)_ reach out to people maintaining the Wiki and ask them if they can 
create such form wit help of Wiki/TCMS and can sustain bigger number of 
test cases (i.e up to 300)


*II stage*

To ponder as the whole community the process of 
adding/creating/deleting/marking/prioritizing  test cases.


P.S -i can try to prepare for the middle of the next week some draft to 
point 1 -it will be something simple but reflecting the idea.



Regards,
Karol



W dniu 2010-12-03 17:36, James Laska pisze:

Just a few extra thoughts on the subject ...

On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 07:30 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:

On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 16:06 +0100, xcieja wrote:

Hi,
yes, you are right there are tests, but in my opinion they are in few
different places under different  categories.

That wasn't what I meant: I meant we already use the Wiki for the
purposes you identified as an advantage of a TCMS (listing the tests
that need to be performed in relation to some specific process, and
whether they have already been performed, by whom, and with which
result).


I think we could organise them better -i.e create test category and put
all of them instead of many places.

We sure could, but we don't necessarily need a TCMS to do this. :) Note
that we do try to keep them all within one Wiki namespace and we do use
Wiki categories to organize some test cases.


Moreover, i just have taken a look briefly and i see there are round 100
test cases in total (please correct me if i am wrong).I think that for
such project/system it is not enough at all.

We have big community, let`s assume everyone from QA create one test, we
will have quite huge number of tests and obviously more faults detected
before main release, less corrections after=better stability,usability-
better overall opinion.

Sure, we can always do with more test cases.

More test cases/plans would certainly change the conversation a bit.  I
think we all want to increase the value that the Fedora QA team can
offer to the project.  One way to increase our value is by improving our
test coverage by way of test documentation (procedures, plans and
cases).  There are plenty of other ways ... but we can save those for
other threads.

I've always been hesitant to add tests for the sake of adding tests.
Test plans/cases are just like software.  If the tests aren't addressing
a priority issue, they won't be used as much, and like unused software,
will suffer from bit rot.  The best test cases/plans are the ones
frequently used, referenced and have maintainer buy-in.  Meaning, if the
tests fail, the maintainer cares.  I want to grow the library of tests
we maintain and run, but hopefully grow in a manner and pace that we, as
a community, can sustain.

With the test plans that Adam points to, I'm pretty confident in our
ability to develop, discuss/debate and execute desktop and installation
tests as a community.  We've ironed out the kinks in the workflow,
increased community engagement and developed good test plans as a
result.  My impression is we are ready for additional test areas.

That's what's exciting to me about the proventesters effort.  As you can
tell from recent (and old) devel@ list threads, testing proposed updates
is important work that's needed, requested by package maintainers and
well under-documentated.  I don't worry as much that tests written for
frequent proventester use will go stale given it's been a long-standing
exposure in the project.  Also, given the huge number of components in
Fedora, there is room for just about every contributor to participate
and carve out a niche.  But which tests do we prioritize first, where do
we write the tests, where to review+discuss them, how to run them etc...
(more on this later).

For me, these are two separate (but related) efforts.  TCMS is tool
designed to address specific workflow/tracking needs.  We also need to
determine how to best to sustainably expand the test coverage we can
offer to the project.  We have a wiki-based TCMS now.  It has met our
needs for the current set of organized test efforts.  It's not perfect,
but the return on the investment has been huge.  The questions I'd like
to see answered in ticket#152, is (1) whether the wiki can continue to
scale as our test management needs grow, and (2) what aspects of our
wiki-based TCMS are good/bad?

Thanks,
James
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: [Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management

2010-12-02 Thread Fedora QA
#152: Test Cases Management
--+-
  Reporter:  rhe  |   Owner:  rhe  
  Type:  enhancement  |  Status:  new  
  Priority:  major|   Milestone:  Fedora 15
 Component:  Wiki | Version:   
Resolution:   |Keywords:  retrospective
--+-
Comment (by adamwill):

 I know James has been talking about this with some RH people. We discussed
 it on the phone and agreed that we like the idea in principle but the ease
 and flexibility of the current wiki system is something we don't want to
 lose, so we thought we should set some quite high barriers: any tcms
 system must be as easy to use (both for those creating the test cases and
 those running them) as the wiki is.

-- 
Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/152#comment:1
Fedora QA http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test


Re: [Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management

2010-12-02 Thread Fedora QA
#152: Test Cases Management
--+-
  Reporter:  rhe  |   Owner:  rhe  
  Type:  enhancement  |  Status:  new  
  Priority:  major|   Milestone:  Fedora 15
 Component:  Wiki | Version:   
Resolution:   |Keywords:  retrospective
--+-
Comment (by jlaska):

 I love the idea of doing a test event with a pilot instance of
 nitrate/TCMS.  It was fun doing that with the semantic-mediawiki, and I
 think we learn a lot with that approach.  We've all talked about TCMS and
 how best to integrate it with our workflow.  There are definite
 shortcomings to our current wiki-based approach that limit our ability to
 growth, but there are plenty of positive lessons learned that I think we
 should recognize and prioritize.

 Hurry: Would you be willing to start drafting some wiki content so we can
 capture this?  Either a requirements or technology comparison document?  I
 don't want this to be a free-for-all 'I want a pony' list of features we
 want of a TCMS solution.  But perhaps starting with documenting the pro's
 and con's with our current wiki-based workflow?  The goal for me would be
 to identify what our MUST-HAVE and NICE-TO-HAVE's are from any solution.
 Ideally, we can use that to determine the best route forward (whether it's
 filing bugs/tickets/rfe's against TCMS, or something else).

-- 
Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/152#comment:2
Fedora QA http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test


Re: Re: [Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management

2010-12-02 Thread xcieja
Hi,
i can say i am new to Fedora in general as project but i have 
participated in many testing campaigns professionaly, so honestly i see 
this TCMS(?) or any other way to organise test cases as big add value.

It would be really great if we had a list of test cases for whole system 
(of course everyone can contibute) and mark each of them as 
successful/failed, track the status etc...

The one of the advantages is that i am looking at such list of test 
cases and i am able to easily figure out what has been already tested 
and wht remaining is.

If have missed something and such 'thing exists please correct me an 
forget the idea, otherwise what do you think ??


Regards,
Karol

W dniu 20:59, Fedora QA pisze:
 ם�z�BjǬ1�ځ鞞ߑz�+���㰝秅��zg��+Z��'{늊�)���̊W�h��y
 ���w��h��W��*'E�(��b�r��
 +v�޶�,��-��
 ��z{[ɧZ����'�Z��!j��z{Z�H�a���(��G��)��v+��v+h��^�'y��j
 �y�aj��)��u梞��ȩ^y�jw_��bn)b�*����ޞ��+2�צ��(��a�x0y�'����%�Ǭ����.����zb�ڮ���Ƨ���̬�馺�[y�j̭��n�a~�톋r���)��z�\jǬjwm�����x-�隲�^�)���rG�Q��l���v�چ�-y�+���v�ک�����y��Wm���y�+j,��h��y�+j��y�+i��+r�.���e===
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test