My small "Surprise" for our Users and Testers

[vicmarcal]

A couple weeks ago I promised a small surprise for those who joined the Coordinated testing.

ReactOS Users and Testers helped a lot to have ReactOS 0.3.13 on-time. I have never feel so proud watching people contributing and testing as mad (some of you tested more than 20 apps when I just requested 3 ) !!

Thanks to your cool work we were able to test +100 apps in less than 2 days instead 1 or 2 weeks.

I know that my little surprise is not big,and I promise next time I'll try to do something bigger and better. But, ey!, this was just the first time of many more!

I have extended the surprise not just to the people of the thread, but also to anyone who have added an app in the Testing 0.3.13 wiki page.

I really want to create a Coordinated Testing Team, official (if possible), hope you'll want to join it when the time arrives.

And now, enjoy it, it is all yours!: http://bit.ly/fKMq8Z

PS: I have used a short-link to avoid spoiling the surprise!

[Black_Fox]

That's really nice I can already see the links going in all ways: "Everybody look what I got!"

[sh4ring4n]

A couple weeks ago I promised a small surprise for those who joined the Coordinated testing.

ReactOS Users and Testers helped a lot to have ReactOS 0.3.13 on-time. I have never feel so proud watching people contributing and testing as mad (some of you tested more than 20 apps when I just requested 3 ) !!

Thanks to your cool work we were able to test +100 apps in less than 2 days instead 1 or 2 weeks.

I know that my little surprise is not big,and I promise next time I'll try to do something bigger and better. But, ey!, this was just the first time of many more!

I have extended the surprise not just to the people of the thread, but also to anyone who have added an app in the Testing 0.3.13 wiki page.

I really want to create a Coordinated Testing Team, official (if possible), hope you'll want to join it when the time arrives.

And now, enjoy it, it is all yours!: http://bit.ly/fKMq8Z

PS: I have used a short-link to avoid spoiling the surprise!

I can't believe it, It's actually happening.

[mrugiero]

Love it! Thanks a lot!

[greenie]

That was awesome

I was just thinking that a php testing system would be cool. I could help. I have pretty good php experience.

I was thinking something with 2 columns. One for untested apps and one for tested apps(this would be a list of key apps we follow for one reason or another). As people test and put in the results. The app would get switched to the tested column automatically. Of course this would be impractical for every revision. So maybe on a weekly or monthly basis a testers iso is selected.

We kinda do have a testing system already. the Compatibility Database. So maybe this is just a simple page querying if results are available for a particular apps with revision(to check if they are in tested or non-tested column) and hyper link to create or view.

Just an idea off the top of my head. i'm sure it's very flawed.

[gonzoMD]

Victor: Thanks, that was very nice!!!

That was awesome

I was just thinking that a php testing system would be cool. I could help. I have pretty good php experience.

I was thinking something with 2 columns. One for untested apps and one for tested apps(this would be a list of key apps we follow for one reason or another). As people test and put in the results. The app would get switched to the tested column automatically. Of course this would be impractical for every revision. So maybe on a weekly or monthly basis a testers iso is selected.

We kinda do have a testing system already. the Compatibility Database. So maybe this is just a simple page querying if results are available for a particular apps with revision(to check if they are in tested or non-tested column) and hyper link to create or view.

Just an idea off the top of my head. i'm sure it's very flawed.

I like the Idea, maybe this test can be also automaticaly merged ro AppDB
I don't like webdevelopment as much as high-language development, but maybe I could contribute to this too

[vicmarcal]

We kinda do have a testing system already. the Compatibility Database. So maybe this is just a simple page querying if results are available for a particular apps with revision(to check if they are in tested or non-tested column) and hyper link to create or view.

Just an idea off the top of my head. i'm sure it's very flawed.

Hi greenie!
What do you think about changing current Testing Central wikipage?
Using your idea we can reface the wikipage a little.One column with green(tested)/red(needs testing) colour. And other column with a link to the app in the Compatibility Database(RCD). The tester will fill the form there so we would be killing "2 birds in a shot", one a coordinated testing and also keeping the RCD updated.
Using the new compatibility database is much easier now, and also its new Bugzilla integration shows in the App Form any bug related to the app. We can ask the reporter to check if the Bug is still happening updating accordingly the Bugreport(i.e: Still happening in r5XXXX or ie: Fixed now )
As you perfectly pointed is quite difficult to do with each revision, so we can select a revision and test it during 2 weeks, and then moving to a new one. Full testing 2 revisions at month should be more than enough to catch regressions.

What do you (you and all of testers around) think about this idea?

[mrugiero]

We kinda do have a testing system already. the Compatibility Database. So maybe this is just a simple page querying if results are available for a particular apps with revision(to check if they are in tested or non-tested column) and hyper link to create or view.

Just an idea off the top of my head. i'm sure it's very flawed.

Hi greenie!
What do you think about changing current Testing Central wikipage?
Using your idea we can reface the wikipage a little.One column with green(tested)/red(needs testing) colour. And other column with a link to the app in the Compatibility Database(RCD). The tester will fill the form there so we would be killing "2 birds in a shot", one a coordinated testing and also keeping the RCD updated.
Using the new compatibility database is much easier now, and also its new Bugzilla integration shows in the App Form any bug related to the app. We can ask the reporter to check if the Bug is still happening updating accordingly the Bugreport(i.e: Still happening in r5XXXX or ie: Fixed now )
As you perfectly pointed is quite difficult to do with each revision, so we can select a revision and test it during 2 weeks, and then moving to a new one. Full testing 2 revisions at month should be more than enough to catch regressions.

What do you (you and all of testers around) think about this idea?

I like it.

[Pesho]

Aw man, now i feel bad that i didn't test more apps I'd be happy to join the orgianized testing whenever it's set into motion.

[sh4ring4n]

We kinda do have a testing system already. the Compatibility Database. So maybe this is just a simple page querying if results are available for a particular apps with revision(to check if they are in tested or non-tested column) and hyper link to create or view.

Just an idea off the top of my head. i'm sure it's very flawed.

Hi greenie!
What do you think about changing current Testing Central wikipage?
Using your idea we can reface the wikipage a little.One column with green(tested)/red(needs testing) colour. And other column with a link to the app in the Compatibility Database(RCD). The tester will fill the form there so we would be killing "2 birds in a shot", one a coordinated testing and also keeping the RCD updated.
Using the new compatibility database is much easier now, and also its new Bugzilla integration shows in the App Form any bug related to the app. We can ask the reporter to check if the Bug is still happening updating accordingly the Bugreport(i.e: Still happening in r5XXXX or ie: Fixed now )
As you perfectly pointed is quite difficult to do with each revision, so we can select a revision and test it during 2 weeks, and then moving to a new one. Full testing 2 revisions at month should be more than enough to catch regressions.

What do you (you and all of testers around) think about this idea?

I'm In.

[greenie]

We kinda do have a testing system already. the Compatibility Database. So maybe this is just a simple page querying if results are available for a particular apps with revision(to check if they are in tested or non-tested column) and hyper link to create or view.

Just an idea off the top of my head. i'm sure it's very flawed.

Hi greenie!
What do you think about changing current Testing Central wikipage?
Using your idea we can reface the wikipage a little.One column with green(tested)/red(needs testing) colour. And other column with a link to the app in the Compatibility Database(RCD). The tester will fill the form there so we would be killing "2 birds in a shot", one a coordinated testing and also keeping the RCD updated.
Using the new compatibility database is much easier now, and also its new Bugzilla integration shows in the App Form any bug related to the app. We can ask the reporter to check if the Bug is still happening updating accordingly the Bugreport(i.e: Still happening in r5XXXX or ie: Fixed now )
As you perfectly pointed is quite difficult to do with each revision, so we can select a revision and test it during 2 weeks, and then moving to a new one. Full testing 2 revisions at month should be more than enough to catch regressions.

What do you (you and all of testers around) think about this idea?

every 2 weeks sounds like a good idea. weekly is too frequent and monthly probably isn't frequent enough.

I think doing it in the wiki could be a bit of a pain. for one every 2 weeks you would have to manually clear it and seeing past results would not be available(unless you manually create a new wiki each time).

If it is time to get this running that worries you(understandably we all see vapor-ware). This would only take me a day or 2. I would just need the database structure for appdb and templates for include files. eg to open db(though I don't actually need the login info), for login and how your template system works.

In fact that entire testing page could be done very quickly. add something for DEVELOPERS REQUESTs section. maybe a regression table(though this could be automated to an extent by checking the previous tests, though it would be simplistic).

The only thing that would need to be changed on compatibility app code is the ability to pre-fill forms with a query string.


Thats just me though. I'm a sucker for trying to having a system for everything.

[wojo664]

Thanks for putting me in

[sh4ring4n]

hmmm... this looks like this: http://www.reactos.org/compat/?show=list&tag=GoldenApps

[Saibamen]

Thanks. It's very motivating

[mfldelton]

bro, you definitely missed mine