Massive Konqueror Regression

[Christian Loose]

On Thursday 18 August 2005 20:34, Geoffrey Huang wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-08-18 at 12:12 -0600, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> >
> > this is true if we have just a few people doing it. if there were enough
> > people using KDE from SVN on a day to day basis, statistically we'd get
> > rather good coverage. but if we had a small number of very active testers
> > (e.g. a q/a department that was funded) then building task lists would be
> > the first order of business.
>
> I have to disagree about this.  If we assume that the distribution of
> probabilities for code executed was uniform, then you'd be correct:
> given a moderate number of testers, all code paths would get executed.
> I'd be willing to bet, however, that the majority of KDE users will
> execute the same areas of code.  Specifically, I'd bet that error cases
> don't get executed enough, nor do advanced features.  Having a test plan
> would ensure that all parts of the code get executed.  This also
> supports the argument for automation of these tests, since it'll become
> tedious to execute all corners of the code.
>
> Still, if the case is that there aren't good (or readily accessible)
> automation tools out there, the very least is to have a test plan.
>

Well, we have a wiki (http://wiki.kde.org), right? 

So how about the following plan:

a) you create a test plan page there
b) start with a simple application like KCalc and write down how you tested it
c) come back here and tell new contributors how easy it is to 
    1. write those test plans
    2. follow those plans during KDE's alpha and beta phase
d) announce your test plan project on the dot

Your work will be really appreciated. 

Thanks! Christian