On Mon, 1 Mar 2010, Till Maas wrote:
On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 01:30:18PM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010, Will Woods wrote:
>> So I think it would be shortsighted for FESCo to refuse to even discuss
>> a policy about what manual testing is currently required, since any plan
>> for improving the quality of the distribution will always require some
>> amount of manual testing.
>
> agreed.
What kind of tests need to be done always manually? The only ones I can
think are tests for the appearance of applications or tests that require
specific hardware. But in the general case, I do not think that for
every package manual testing will always be required, except while
creating new automatic tests. E.g. if you have a library package with
good unit test and behaviour test coverage and tests for RPM
metadata, what do you want to test manually?
I have a series of basic functionality tests that I run before each yum
release to make sure that there is nothing unforeseen in an update.
I don't think such a set of tests is ridiculous, but I do admit it is
complicated.
-sv