Massive Konqueror Regression

[Geoffrey Huang]

I realize I'm jumping into the middle of the conversation here, but
quality is something I feel strongly about.  W.r.t. Aaron's call for
more human testers, I agree that that certainly would help.  However, I
don't believe you can guarantee quality just by asking people to use a
pre-release version.  Quality -- that is to say, the prevention of
regressions -- relies on repeatable tasks for sane results.  This means,
of course, that the human testers would need to follow a fairly rigorous
test plan.

To be honest, it really makes more sense to me to automate regression
tests, and have humans concentrate on testing new features.  I've done
automated UI testing before, albeit on Windows.  Are there no UI testing
tools that KDE could use?

-g

On Wed, 2005-08-17 at 18:03 -0600, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 August 2005 04:59, David van Hoose wrote:
> > My point in bringing up this topic was to point out that there have been
> > a lot of regressions in KDE in the last two major versions due to
> > far-to-quick releases.
> > There needs to be a longer freeze with better regression tests.
> 
> mode = repeat;
> 
> what we need are more human testers to test things during the freeze periods. 
> we could freeze forever and there'd still be regressions because too many 
> people wait for the final release and then bitch about things afterwards. it 
> would be nice if some of those complainers became testers.
> 
> there are a LOT of things in KDE that simply can't be regression tested 
> automatically. this is because:
> 
> a) a lot of those items are GUI related and require a human sitting there to 
> watch for things (unless you have a GUI regression tester suite available for 
> use ;)
> 
> b) we lack the resources (see the discussion re: syncing where it's both a 
> time and a hardware issue)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> kde-quality mailing list
> kde-quality at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-quality