Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1TGraY-0002HN-CV for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 13:23:42 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of mistfpga.net designates 208.91.199.218 as permitted sender) client-ip=208.91.199.218; envelope-from=steve@mistfpga.net; helo=us2.outbound.mailhostbox.com; Received: from us2.outbound.mailhostbox.com ([208.91.199.218]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1TGraS-0004ho-H7 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 13:23:42 +0000 Received: from [10.10.10.55] (5ad2e75a.bb.sky.com [90.210.231.90]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: steve@mistfpga.net) by us2.outbound.mailhostbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 156D0698B3C; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 13:23:16 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <506301AC.90101@mistfpga.net> Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 14:22:52 +0100 From: steve User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Wladimir References: <5061F8CC.9070906@mistfpga.net> <1348605677.2284.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <5062F4F8.6040504@mistfpga.net> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CTCH-Spam: Unknown X-CTCH-VOD: Unknown X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A020206.506301CB.00AF, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.72 on 172.16.214.9 X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1TGraS-0004ho-H7 Cc: Bitcoin Development List , Bill Hees Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin Testing Project X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 13:23:42 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 26/09/2012 13:49, Wladimir wrote: > Steve, Hi Wladimir, > >> So, currently there are 4 potential places for bugs to be >> reported 1 - jenkins (and unit tests) 2 - git 3 - mailing list 4 >> - forum (bitcointalk...) 5? - is there still the ability to add >> bugs via sourceforge? > > Currently github is the authoritative place to report issues. When > someone reports a bug on the mailing list, IRC or forum, they are > generally asked to make a github issue (or, someone else makes the > issue for them). Failed tests are generally also reported on > github, by the pull tester. excellent, that makes things much easier. > > We currently have 232 issues, mostly classified into categories > such as "Bug", "Improvement", "GUI", "Wallet", and so on. > > Also it's easy to refer to github issues in commits with #123, with > automatic linking. > > I'm not sure it is worth the effort to move to another system > (especially if you need a another login etc...). But I'm probably > misunderstanding what you're trying to do. I think you might be misunderstanding a little. I am not trying to replace the current system, I need to make sure that what I do will be compatible with it (seamlessly so for the developer). I do not want this to generate extra work for the development team. However testing is a lot more than just bug reporting, dont get me wrong bug reports are important, but so is running a testcase and that testcase passing, especially if that testcase is linked to the proof of a requirement. I am trying to develop a qa environment that is conducive to testing and will allow the testers to shine in all their glory :) and we need different tools and methodologies. Git is too developer centric to be useful for organising testing. - however there is a large amount of software that is compatible with git, so the core development team only ever need to work with git. The linking between a bug, the requirement, the fix, the retest, and updating of regression testplan is vital. So is the ability to organise testing campaigns and assigning tests, work units and test relevant docs/scripts/ideas, etc. I hope this clears things up a bit? Cheers, steve > > Wladimir > - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQYwESAAoJEFvEB9dQFvtQ/GUH/jv2c5L0OcL/kHkX/z0Yqbl/ 2IntPLdjXNKLuz0A7BMz7XfUyVmWlZrw44qxmi+Vyk5PKNBjYIidm763xHnTeJLN ULQBckYexMvan9hAyYZUOt85IpesdNgqTIsqh8f49y4roHOy8GT4M/2fhzXpnsGg G9d2m8jWGpj/kxl9qE7/WjVQC4APwBi/NiJsCrcHswgweN+zENc/Pot9YBLxAZu/ ACBUX/xFymRdaZN8P2LWBXuKx6E2WEcBdPCCWArX07wPiBlrashx9Gz6tiNzIiNq x2c4ltLzRa45AmiDtQhwqyTprz/DbyeAYO1sIsfpUxDeu9e3xTb/Zd96jfKIWI0= =iHI1 - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQYwGsAAoJEFvEB9dQFvtQxOsIAKgBBOKHNFtoV2cN+GVqzlip yy0qiMvMTZKrraOhEw8QNNuOlB3LRchi+RDR/PvQkVfuwi/jHB2gUBzlapLoECBv EH8pgT/MO281pXzARgRSVkRYqkb3ljhQz3mEQg9RhR9h5t9g2mL3Tvppt7249Bg8 oGXPj6xmMcrbClF5qDbwQUUDGJfOo4eti0jSVD3qp2NE7QpPVQwuN5buchpoKt3P 9aJnjeZdLmuAk2RPoDaLXUFc9unT8AcnW96juD0zoVA9wKvAa6/8IZQf0mzV4iZP yiWGNOQtBZ+jyu2ixiEnvHqqG2ZmjtUVqWtjHkxYgrCyuuK2jOcTMNEWfn7SfKc= =yP7N -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----