On 14/03/13 02:05, Markus Mohrhard wrote:
>
> 2013/3/13 Michael Meeks :
>>
>> On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 16:17 +0100, Vladimir Benes wrote:
>>> There are several options how to approach this. The first is LDTP [1]
>>> and the other one (in my opinion far better) is Dogtail [2]. If LO uses
>>> standard
Hey Vladimir,
2013/3/13 Michael Meeks :
> Hi Vladimir,
>
> First - great to see you here :-)
>
> On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 16:17 +0100, Vladimir Benes wrote:
>> we were discussing recently how to improve testing of LO's GUI. We found
>> out that situation if more than bad.
So I agree here wit
From: libreoffice-qa on behalf of Vladimir Benes [vbe...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 10:17 AM
To: libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: [Libreoffice-qa] GUI automation
Hi all,
we were discussing recently how to improve testing of LO's GUI. We found
out that situation if
://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-GUI-automation-tp4043560p4043586.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http
Hi Vladimir,
First - great to see you here :-)
On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 16:17 +0100, Vladimir Benes wrote:
> we were discussing recently how to improve testing of LO's GUI. We found
> out that situation if more than bad.
:-)
> There are several options how to approach this. The fi
Hi all,
we were discussing recently how to improve testing of LO's GUI. We found
out that situation if more than bad.
There are several options how to approach this. The first is LDTP [1]
and the other one (in my opinion far better) is Dogtail [2]. If LO uses
standard gtk widgets so they're a11
