On 10/07/2011 09:25 AM, Mark A. Hershberger wrote:
This week I've been watching [[WP:VPT]] and copying relevant issues into
bug reports on Bugzilla. You can see the reports here:
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/29876
I would like to make these bug reports more profitable, though.
As Brion has said (
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=454166570),
we don't really have good acceptance tests to ensure that we produce
consistent behavior with each release.
To begin to solve this, please help me tag relevant bugs "need-unittest"
or "need-parsertest" and then look for that tag and help write tests.
If we do this right, the 1.19 release will be a *lot* smoother.
Mark.
A few related resources:
*
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Testing_portal including instructions
on how to write and maintain tests
*
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Category:MediaWiki_test_plans which
includes test cases for automated *and* manual testing
I'm cc'ing Olena Alexyeenko (User:Olena on
MediaWiki.org), who's been
writing and organizing test cases for manual testing. Olena, you should
probably subscribe to this list if you're not already on.
As I understand it, many use cases discussed on
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical) are
better suited to manual testing than to automated testing -- obscure
browsers, Twinkle/Huggle/various gadgets, file uploads, etc. Thus it
would be a good idea for people to pick those out and write test cases
for us to run manually during the next deployment.
In fact, if someone were really motivated, it would be a good idea to go
back through the Village Pump discussions and bug reports from the last
few deployments and use them to write up some regression tests.
--
Sumana Harihareswara
Volunteer Development Coordinator
Wikimedia Foundation