[ANN] Conformance testing campaign
Dimitrie O. Paun
dimi at intelliware.ca
Mon Sep 22 11:40:19 CDT 2003
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> "Dimitrie O. Paun" <dpaun at rogers.com> writes:
> > -- for the ME case, how can we have have some
> > results (up to kernel32.dll:codepage) and then
> > have no results? Doesn't that mean that they failed?
> No, this means that when the console test hung the tester
> killed the DOS box and thus did not run further tests.
> Jakob might implement a timeout or we could explain more.
Right, this was my point: it's more of a failure, than
not having run the test (displayed as "."). Maybe we should
say "timeout" for these?
> > -- It would be nice to make the tests name links to
> > the test file. [...] This is tricky though, as it is
> > not clear how to figure this thing out.
> Yes, it must be included in the output. I gave it a try,
> winsock and kernel32 are tricky, for example.
Yes, I've noticed, it's cool (however, as you say, some
of the links are wrong also).
> > -- How do you assign the name to different reports
> > for the same OS?
> It is the name of the directory the data comes from. In
> principle, testers could provide their tags.
How do you make sure they don't collide? If we are to
install this on WineHQ and have it run automatically,
I guess we'll have to create temp dirs. At which point,
that stuff is useless anyway, so I think we should just
drop it altogether. That is, instead of having stuff like:
Win95 Win95dimi Wine95joe .etc
<rest of the table .... >
We should just drop that from the column header, and
<rest of the table .... >
> > -- Also, in the "XXX differences" section, shouldn't we
> > have the exact version & ServicePack displayed between
> > the OS name and the reporter link, as we are dealing
> > with only one instance?
> Sure, but I do not have the information. Noted, though.
How come? I thought Jakob includes a dump of the OS version
structure, like so:
Operating system version:
szCSDVersion=Service Pack 3
> > -- A few links at the top of the page would be nice:
> > 1. To the main Testing page, something like
> > /site/testing
> I am not sure what this main Testing page is...
We will need a Testing status page on WineHQ no? We need a
master page which explains where to get the latest tests,
what you need to do, link to the results, etc. Not done
yet, but needed :)
> I was on holiday last week and will possibly leave again,
> but will surely come back, just wait...
Cool, I can't wait to have this done and integrated in WineHQ.
More information about the wine-devel