Searching for Testers was Re: [OpenAFS] OpenAFS site not geared for beginners...
Christopher D. Clausen
Sat, 2 Sep 2006 15:20:14 -0500
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Jeffrey Altman <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Christopher D. Clausen wrote:
>> I file bug reports (although I haven't had any service crashes
>> recently.) Everything I filed against the Windows client (and
>> possibly the Solaris server, but still testing) seems to be fixed in
>> the latest fc.
> Chris, you are one of the rare few who do test the Windows releases
> and file bug reports. It is good to know that the issues you have
> come across have been fixed. The problem that I am trying to address
> is how do I know that (a) previous issues have been fixed; (b) that
> new ones were not created; and (c) that existing ones simply have not
> been reported.
> If I fail to receive a bug report from you, does that mean that:
> (a) you have tested the build and that all is good
> (b) you have not tested the build at all
> (c) you have not tested the build on a platform that would
> experience a problem
Oh, so I should email the list with something like:
"testing 1.5.0702 on Windows 2003 SP2. No problems encountered so far."
> I am imagining something a bit more formal. In fact, speaking of web
> design work, perhaps what we need is a web form checklist that can be
> easily filled out as a report.
> * OpenAFS release
> * OS platform
> * Hardware architecture
> * A list of tests to perform with success and failure options.
> If a test fails, then a text field for inputing a description
> of the failure.
> If there was another page that could be dynamically updated so people
> could see what combinations of <OpenAFS release, OS, architecture>
> had been tested, then people could jump in to fill in the gaps.
Yeah, some sort of list of things to check would be useful.
>> I can (and have been trying to as often as possible) test clients on
>> Windows 2003 Server (SP1 and SP2 beta x86) as they are released. I
>> do not currently have any 64-bit OSes running nor do I have any
>> machines running Windows XP or Windows 2000. If no one else has the
>> time, I can setup test systems in a VM and make sure a basic install
>> works, but I would not be actively using software in these VMs. I
>> would assume that testing in actual environments would be preferable.
> Testing in actual environments would be preferable in some cases.
> However, VMs are certainly nice for the ability to perform snapshots.
> Especially when you want to be able to test the behavior of a clean
Would it be possible to get access to the automated testing framework?
I'm almost sure such tests could be run in VMs as well. Or is this not
needed b/c others are already running such tests?
>> Also, I typically use the Windows cmd prompt myself and don't notice
>> GUI issues (which is why I didn't notice that the explorer extention
>> was broken until a week ago. Its been broken on my installs for
>> several months.)
> If there was an item on a checklist that asked "Does the AFS Shell
> Extension menu appear for XXX?" would you test it for each release?
It would probably be best if someone else wrote up the checklist though.
Christopher D. Clausen