Ok, thanks Peter!

Btw, on a side note, I saw a few  bugs that might be related to qttracker 
abi...these bugs all look like they're related to the same problem...

They're all filed against 1.1 Testing


*        Unable to launch the chat application(Bug 8351 
http://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=8351

*        Unable to launch the dialer application(Bug 8356 
http://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=8356

*        Unable to launch the sms application(Bug 8358 
http://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=8358

*        Unable to launch the people application(Bug 8360 
http://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=8360


Any ideas?  I'm thinking it might be related to the Handset project not 
building against the 1.1 Core Testing repository (but rather the 1.1 Core 
repository)....

rs

On 10/13/10 12:37 AM, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,

For Tracker/Content FW Jean-Luc and for MTF I am the QA contact person.

MTF has many automated tests and we are working on to be able to run all before 
releasing to any repos.
At the moment we can run only manual and unit tests on N900 and soon on nDCK. 
The goal is to be able to do full testing: API and benchmarks as well.

Regards,
-Peter

On Oct 9, 2010, at 12:12 AM, ext Selbak, Rolla N wrote:

> This is great news indeed!
>
> Hardware to test:
>
> N900
> NCDK
> MRST CDK
> S10
>
> Kaitlin came up with this spreadsheet (attached) that might be helpful when 
> coming up with tests...thought you might find it useful...
>
> When is the expected time these tests will be available and run? And who will 
> be the QA contact for this?
>
> As far as where to publish the results, honestly as long as it's standard, 
> and Core Release engineering can clearly read the reports, and as long as 
> it's clear which repos are being tested (i.e. Trunk:Tested, vs. Trunk vs. 
> 1.1:Testing, vs. 1.1), and what the scope is, it's fine with me in a Release 
> Engineering standpoint.  Of course others might have more specific opinions 
> on where these results should go.
>
> Thanks,
>
> rs
>
> On 10/8/10 7:41 AM, "jean-luc lamadon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> For libmeegotouch & co, as well as tracker, we (the teams developing
> these components) are ramping up the execution of unit tests and
> functional tests (if we can) before submitting a request to qt-mtf or
> trunk:testing
> As soon as the test tools dependencies are met, we will execute all
> functional and performance tests as well.
>
> Which hw do you expect us to test on ? besides n900
> Where would you like the test results to be published ?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jean-Luc Lamadon
>
> On 08/10/10 09:14, ext Selbak, Rolla N wrote:
>> On 10/7/10 11:09 PM, "[email protected]"<[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi Rolla,
>>>
>>>
>>>> I accepted, but question (and forgive me if this is common
>>>> knowledge)...
>>>>
>>>> Where are the test results posted?  (was it the just in the email
>>>> entitled "Testing old LMT with new mcompositor" or something official from
>>>> QA?)
>>>>
>>> Inline on BMC#7881, far from official testing by QA.
>>>
>>>
>>>> What HW do you test on?
>>>>
>>> N900
>>>
>>>
>>>> The Compositor effects many different verticals, and I want to make
>>>> sure testing is done on a few different platforms, and not just one...
>>>>
>>> We are aware of the risk and moving to MeeGo 1.1 testing is only a step.
>>> It has been decided to do more testing (official from QA on the different
>>> verticals)
>>> as soon as this package is available in MeeGo 1.1 testing.
>>> The final decision is still not done and Sean Kelley is responsible
>>> to follow this bug (and influence the final decision).
>>>
>> Ok...in general, MeeGo:1.1:Core:Testing _is_ considered more of a final step
>> than a stepping stone...the idea is that for important pkgs (like qt-mtf
>> related ones), QA do due diligence on all effected verticals, not just n900,
>> before submitting to :Testing.
>>
>> I understand this is a very dire situation, so I'm letting you know for the
>> future...
>>
>> Where are the QA results from MeeGo:1.1:Core:Testing posted?  Specifically
>> the ones that test the QT-MTF functionality?
>>
>> rs
>>
>>
>>> That's my understanding.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Fathi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> MeeGo-packaging mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-packaging
>>
>>
>
>
> <core-test-image-for-qt-mtf.xls>


_______________________________________________
MeeGo-packaging mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-packaging

Reply via email to