Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

Bjoern Michaelsen wrote > > Can you maybe be on the QA call tomorrrow? > I'm afraid not. 15:00 UTC on any weekday is during my work hours. I will read the minutes later. Regards, Pedro -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Litmus-a-proposal-tp38

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 04:16:59AM -0700, Pedro wrote: > Your comments make perfect sense. I am available to help with a serious > comparison of Litmus vs Caseconductor. Just a quick reply, I am in a rush: That would be awesome. Can you maybe be on the QA call tomorrrow? Best, Bjoern __

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Regressions in Open Source projects ...

Hi Petr, Bjoern, *, Petr Mladek wrote (22-03-12 14:44) Developers are already pretty overloaded. I doubt that they have time to write detailed testcases in Litmus. It does not make sense to write one line in Litmus when it is already mentioned in the commit log. I agree. I suggest that QA v

[Libreoffice-qa] Minutes - QA related - TSC call 2012-03-22

Hi, you can find a summery concerning QA related discussion of the Engineering Steering Committee on Kind regards Rainer ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-q

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Regressions in Open Source projects ...

Hi Petr, all, On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 02:44:38PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote: > I agree with Marcus that often it is not easy to say what functionality > is affected. Various changes might have many side effects. Still, developers are the ones with the best guess there. > I am a bit scared by addin

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Regressions in Open Source projects ...

Hi, it is a bit late but I haven't found time to read this until today. Bjoern Michaelsen píše v Pá 16. 03. 2012 v 22:37 +0100: > On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 08:30:50PM +0100, Markus Mohrhard wrote: > > No it is not that easy. This commit fixed several crashes and problems > > in the copy/paste code.

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

Hi Björn Your comments make perfect sense. I am available to help with a serious comparison of Litmus vs Caseconductor. But if Mozilla is going to drop Litmus, does that make sense? Or should you (TDF) collaborate with Mozilla to make sure that the new tool suits our needs, since the old one will

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

Hi Pedro, On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:04:51AM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote: > That is already perfectly clear -- as you know we already have a bug for that > -- and thus need no repeating. But punching the codeconductor devs for not > having your pet feature in a prerelease of their free (as in

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:44:46PM -0700, Pedro wrote: > I thought it was what WE (you , me, TDF, the LO project,etc) are missing. That is already perfectly clear -- as you know we already have a bug for that -- and thus need no repeating. But punching the codeconductor devs for not having your