Hi Joerg,
On Tue, 2006-11-07 at 12:40 +0100, Joerg Sievers wrote:
+ specifications are critical for (at a minimum):
+ file formats
+ complex / unfamiliar behaviours
+ behaviour changes affecting other's work (e.g. the automated
gui testing is extremely dependent to the basics
Hi Michael,
Michael Meeks wrote:
+ specifications are critical for (at a minimum):
+ file formats
+ complex / unfamiliar behaviours
+ behaviour changes affecting other's work (e.g. the automated gui
testing is extremely dependent to the basics of OOo)
* (Perhaps)
Niklas Nebel wrote:
Kohei Yoshida wrote:
On 11/3/06, Mathias Bauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let's put it that way: it should be possible to integrate something even
if the original goal laid out in the spec wasn't reached but the result
is good enough. Good enough means that we could live
Kohei Yoshida wrote:
On 11/3/06, Mathias Bauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let's put it that way: it should be possible to integrate something even
if the original goal laid out in the spec wasn't reached but the result
is good enough. Good enough means that we could live with it even if
nothing
On 11/6/06, Niklas Nebel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kohei Yoshida wrote:
On 11/3/06, Mathias Bauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let's put it that way: it should be possible to integrate something even
if the original goal laid out in the spec wasn't reached but the result
is good enough. Good
On 11/3/06, Mathias Bauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let's put it that way: it should be possible to integrate something even
if the original goal laid out in the spec wasn't reached but the result
is good enough. Good enough means that we could live with it even if
nothing was changed until the
Frank Schönheit - Sun Microsystems Germany [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What are testshl2 and cppunit?
(No, I don't want to google. I want the pointer to the Wiki page where
you document their usage inside OOo :)
Hi Frank,
glad to tell _you_ something new. ;-)
cppunit is a port of JUnit to
Hi Thorsten,
well, there actually _are_ several test frameworks in place. From what
you've probably in mind, testshl2 should come close. It's basically
cppunit dressed up to work in OOo's build environment. See
e.g. o3tl/qa/makefile.mk on how to employ it.
Always learning something new ...
Hi Kohei,
Kohei Yoshida wrote:
Michael Meeks wrote:
+ The primary consumer of a finished spec. is QA
If the developer is the same as the spec writer. Else the developer is
as important a consumer as the QA.
So, the language used in the spec should be oriented toward QA
personnel
So, the language used in the spec should be oriented toward QA
personnel (i.e. less advertising or selling tone, but more
technicality and correctness).
A spec is a strictly technical document. Advertisement and selling has
nothing to do with it.
Yes, that was my understanding as well. But
On 11/2/06, Michael Meeks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems there has been a wide-ranging debate on the spec. topic wrt.
reducing potentially discouraging barriers to entry for community
contributors. I tried to summarise where I -think- we're at, and then
present some principles some
On 11/3/06, Niklas Nebel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kohei Yoshida wrote:
Another point I want to mention is that, perhaps the UI design
requirement at CWS integration time should be relaxed a bit. Instead
of requiring UE approveal of the UI change at cws integration time,
either QA or peer
Kohei Yoshida wrote:
+ UE - get involved before before the feature is
implemented, or have some veto role
Not sure how this works out for a feature that arrives complete,
that is, for a feature that was originally external to OO.o (hence
missed the initial discussion
Kohei Yoshida wrote:
On 11/3/06, Niklas Nebel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kohei Yoshida wrote:
Another point I want to mention is that, perhaps the UI design
requirement at CWS integration time should be relaxed a bit. Instead
of requiring UE approveal of the UI change at cws integration
Michael Meeks [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[excellent proposal for an enhanced spec process]
+ Unit Tests
+ we need a good, standard, very easy to use unit
test framework, that can trivially be extended.
Hi Michael,
well, there actually _are_ several test frameworks in
Hi Michael,
I agree on many points:
Michael Meeks wrote:
[..]
* Proposed new process
Sorry, didn't find something new :-(
[..]
+ New spec. process:
+ 'Wiki' based solution (for those that want it)
This has been already accepted.
+ minimal data required for good QA
16 matches
Mail list logo
