multi-touch-dev team mailing list archive

[Bryce Harrington <bryce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 08:54:17AM +0200, Ara Pulido wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> On 04/07/2010 10:38 PM, Bryce Harrington wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 09:45:57PM +0200, Stéphane Chatty wrote:
> >>
> >> Le 7 avr. 10 à 21:04, Bryce a écrit :
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Looking forward to rafi's testing tool.  So far figuring out how
> >>> to test
> >>> MT is perplexing me.
> > 
> > Fwiw, I'm working my way through this document with the hardware, and
> > updating bits as I go:
> > 
> >    https://wiki.ubuntu.com/X/Testing/Touchscreen
> 
> Why don't we use the document under
> http://testcases.qa.ubuntu.com/Hardware/Touchscreen/Single?
> How is it different from yours? If you think it is missing an important
> testcase, let me know, and I'll add it. Otherwise, I think we should
> agree in one document and use it throughout our testing.

Ara, for future note... if a testcase is created based on a page under
X/Testing, make sure to clear the X/Testing page and put a link to the
qa page, like I did with https://wiki.ubuntu.com/X/Testing/ProprietaryDrivers

Otherwise, I'm likely to simply not notice the qa team made a copy of
the test plan and is working on it.

Anyway, yeah that's fine if you want to merge the changes.

> > Ara, question... how will test results be reported from this document?
> > E.g. in the Device Support Test it is possible to find a failure on
> > several of the steps, so if it failed on, say, step 4 would that be
> > reported as "Failed #1.4"?
> 
> Depending on how fine-grained we want the results. If we need to know in
> the report (apart from a possible comment) where the test have failed,
> then "Failed #1.4". If for a quick browsing of results is not necessary,
> we could just put:
> 
> Testcase Result 	Comments
> 1	 Failed	  	Failed on step 1.4 because blah, blah

Well, I won't worry about it for now, testing is kind of informal
currently.  You may want to break things down more fine grained if we
scale up the testing at some point, so it's easier to keep track of what
exactly failed more definitively.

Bryce