[Collaborative Testing]GoldenAPPs r52433

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

vicmarcal
Test Team
Posts: 2732
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:35 pm

[Collaborative Testing]GoldenAPPs r52433

Post by vicmarcal »

Hi!
I have recreated the Testing Central (GoldenApps section).
Now it is much simpler to test and easier to give a feedback. Each entry in the table has a: Link to download the app, the Last known working revision, and a link to fill a small report.
The best thing is that it will help to have the Compatibility Database updated,at the same time we track if any regression has happened.
Please help updating the GoldenApps table. They are less than 20 apps.Pick just 2, test them and update the Wiki table.
http://reactos.org/wiki/Testing_Central#GOLDENAPPS
With just 10 testers we can have it done quite easily!
Thanks for helping in this collaborative testing!
PD: The revision to be tested is 52433 http://iso.reactos.org/bootcd/bootcd-52433-dbg.7z

sh4ring4n
Posts: 120
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 2:05 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: [Collaborative Testing]GoldenAPPs r52433

Post by sh4ring4n »

*10 seconds later*
Time to test :D

EDIT: Got Firefox 2 :D but with crashing issues :(
EDIT: Finished AIDA32 :D
Last edited by sh4ring4n on Mon Jul 04, 2011 12:06 am, edited 2 times in total.
The cake is a lie!

Murmur
Posts: 142
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 8:16 pm

Re: [Collaborative Testing]GoldenAPPs r52433

Post by Murmur »

I am at the end of my bandwidth and a few days left to go, ill test some stuff next month.

Bblaauw
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 12:59 am

Re: [Collaborative Testing]GoldenAPPs r52433

Post by Bblaauw »

I've missed what this GoldenApps thing is exactly, otherwise I'd be happy to help a bit.
Are the GoldenApps programs that actually installed 100% properly in the past, as well as functioned 100% properly in the past, on ReactOS?
It's easier to regression-test programs that should be working perfectly, rather than seeing what additional functionality has been broken or added.

If those apps didn't work 100% in the first place, I'd much rather have the ReactOS Downloader list updated by *adding* (not replacing) the latest version of each program. Such a nuisance to have to install a browser from your list only to replace it by another one a few minutes later, same for other programs. OpenOffice 3.4, FireFox 5 come to mind, maybe other programs.

wojo664
Posts: 320
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 5:39 pm

Re: [Collaborative Testing]GoldenAPPs r52433

Post by wojo664 »

WinRar tested :-)

SomeGuy
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:48 am
Location: Marietta, GA

Re: [Collaborative Testing]GoldenAPPs r52433

Post by SomeGuy »

That link to FAR Manager 1.70 is broken. (downloads a zero byte file)

wojo664
Posts: 320
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 5:39 pm

Re: [Collaborative Testing]GoldenAPPs r52433

Post by wojo664 »

For some reason link forwards to "uptown.net" but installer for 1.75 is "http://www.farmanager.com/files/Far175b ... 110203.msi"

vicmarcal
Test Team
Posts: 2732
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: [Collaborative Testing]GoldenAPPs r52433

Post by vicmarcal »

SomeGuy wrote:That link to FAR Manager 1.70 is broken. (downloads a zero byte file)
Damn!Feel free to update the link to any 1.70 Far Manager download :)

vicmarcal
Test Team
Posts: 2732
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: [Collaborative Testing]GoldenAPPs r52433

Post by vicmarcal »

Bblaauw wrote:I've missed what this GoldenApps thing is exactly, otherwise I'd be happy to help a bit.
Are the GoldenApps programs that actually installed 100% properly in the past, as well as functioned 100% properly in the past, on ReactOS?
It's easier to regression-test programs that should be working perfectly, rather than seeing what additional functionality has been broken or added.

If those apps didn't work 100% in the first place, I'd much rather have the ReactOS Downloader list updated by *adding* (not replacing) the latest version of each program. Such a nuisance to have to install a browser from your list only to replace it by another one a few minutes later, same for other programs. OpenOffice 3.4, FireFox 5 come to mind, maybe other programs.
GoldenApps are supposed to be working 99.99% perfectly. So its basic and advanced functionalities should work perfectly.
If they are not, then it is a regression or a small bug we didn't catched yet.
Firefox 5 is a different app compared with Firefox 4, so that is the reason GoldenApp is not updated. There are specific bugs for each version.
:)

SomeGuy
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:48 am
Location: Marietta, GA

Re: [Collaborative Testing]GoldenAPPs r52433

Post by SomeGuy »

I attempted to test Acrobat Reader 7.10, but it just hung during installation.

Tried out VLC and basic video and DVD playing seems to work well. I couldn't get the VirtualBox AC97 drivers to work under this ReactOS revision, so no sound.

Is there any list of things to test? Some of those programs have functionality I probably would not think to try in a thousand years.

Also I changed that FarManager 1.70 link to another one I found, but someone more familiar with that application should check to make sure it is legit. Some of the sites I saw while looking for it looked kind of scammy.

User avatar
Saibamen
Posts: 212
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:19 am
Location: Poland
Contact:

Re: [Collaborative Testing]GoldenAPPs r52433

Post by Saibamen »

vicmarcal: can i update GoldenAPPs on Wiki?
ReactOS Forum Global Moderator
IT-Maniak.pl administrator

vicmarcal
Test Team
Posts: 2732
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: [Collaborative Testing]GoldenAPPs r52433

Post by vicmarcal »

Saibamen wrote:vicmarcal: can i update GoldenAPPs on Wiki?
If update means "adding results to the apps there" then yes.
If update means "adding new apps or upgrading from Firefox 4 to 5,etc.." then please talk with me first.
:)

User avatar
Saibamen
Posts: 212
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:19 am
Location: Poland
Contact:

Re: [Collaborative Testing]GoldenAPPs r52433

Post by Saibamen »

New field - Mozilla Firefox 5.0

and delete support for Firefox 2.X

Adobe Reader 7.1 -> Adobe Reader X 10.1.0
Foxit Reader 2.1 -> Foxit Reader 5.0.1.0523
Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 -> Thunderbird 5.0
Abiword 2.6.4 -> Abiword 2.8.6
FAR Manager 1.7 -> FAR Manager 2.0
Winrar 3.80 -> Winrar 4.01
7-Zip 4.65 -> 7-Zip 9.20
DosBox 0.72 -> DosBox 0.74
Mirc 6.35 -> Mirc 7.19
IrfanView 4.23 -> IrfanView 4.30
SeaMonkey 1.1.17 -> SeaMonkey 2.1
AIDA32 3.94 -> AIDA32 3.94.2
SciTE 1.77 -> SciTE 2.27
VLC Media Player 0.8.6i -> VLC Media Player 1.1.10
ReactOS Forum Global Moderator
IT-Maniak.pl administrator

vicmarcal
Test Team
Posts: 2732
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: [Collaborative Testing]GoldenAPPs r52433

Post by vicmarcal »

Saibamen wrote:New field - Mozilla Firefox 5.0

and delete support for Firefox 2.X

Adobe Reader 7.1 -> Adobe Reader X 10.1.0
Foxit Reader 2.1 -> Foxit Reader 5.0.1.0523
Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 -> Thunderbird 5.0
Abiword 2.6.4 -> Abiword 2.8.6
FAR Manager 1.7 -> FAR Manager 2.0
Winrar 3.80 -> Winrar 4.01
7-Zip 4.65 -> 7-Zip 9.20
DosBox 0.72 -> DosBox 0.74
Mirc 6.35 -> Mirc 7.19
IrfanView 4.23 -> IrfanView 4.30
SeaMonkey 1.1.17 -> SeaMonkey 2.1
AIDA32 3.94 -> AIDA32 3.94.2
SciTE 1.77 -> SciTE 2.27
VLC Media Player 0.8.6i -> VLC Media Player 1.1.10

Hi Saibamen!
Well...the idea is not keeping updating the GoldenApps, but using a fixed set of apps to control regressions.
The real idea of GoldenApps is having a fixed set to compare one revision against other.If we update the apps then we will lose totally the point.
i.e: Imagine that Mirc 6.25 was working in 52345 but Mirc 7.19 is not working in 52450. Does it provide any info?Nope. Maybe 7.19 didnt work at all in 52345?or maybe 6.25 is working in 52450?
I'll pick one example: Opera 11 is not launching but Opera 9.64 works flawlessly. Firefox 2 was working perfect, but for a quite long time Firefox 3.5 was giving headaches with fonts.
So from a testing point of view, a SeaMonkey 2.1 is not SeaMonkey 1.1.17. Opera 9.64 is not Opera 11...etc.

Of course it doesnt mean we can include them in GoldenApps if they work perfect!, but not as an update but as a new entry(having 2 entries: one for Seamonkey 1.1.17 and other entry for SeaMonkey 2.1. That way we can still control regressions thanks to 1.1.17 and we add new apps to the list. The main problem: We would be duplicating the number of apps to be tested, and we dont have the manpower to do it.

So when testers joins the team, we will improve the table with those apps you suggested...but as you can see after some days just 4 r 5 apps were tested. So I doubt we will integrate more apps until the Community changes a little...

mrugiero
Posts: 482
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:12 am

Re: [Collaborative Testing]GoldenAPPs r52433

Post by mrugiero »

vicmarcal wrote:
Saibamen wrote:New field - Mozilla Firefox 5.0

and delete support for Firefox 2.X

Adobe Reader 7.1 -> Adobe Reader X 10.1.0
Foxit Reader 2.1 -> Foxit Reader 5.0.1.0523
Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 -> Thunderbird 5.0
Abiword 2.6.4 -> Abiword 2.8.6
FAR Manager 1.7 -> FAR Manager 2.0
Winrar 3.80 -> Winrar 4.01
7-Zip 4.65 -> 7-Zip 9.20
DosBox 0.72 -> DosBox 0.74
Mirc 6.35 -> Mirc 7.19
IrfanView 4.23 -> IrfanView 4.30
SeaMonkey 1.1.17 -> SeaMonkey 2.1
AIDA32 3.94 -> AIDA32 3.94.2
SciTE 1.77 -> SciTE 2.27
VLC Media Player 0.8.6i -> VLC Media Player 1.1.10

Hi Saibamen!
Well...the idea is not keeping updating the GoldenApps, but using a fixed set of apps to control regressions.
The real idea of GoldenApps is having a fixed set to compare one revision against other.If we update the apps then we will lose totally the point.
i.e: Imagine that Mirc 6.25 was working in 52345 but Mirc 7.19 is not working in 52450. Does it provide any info?Nope. Maybe 7.19 didnt work at all in 52345?or maybe 6.25 is working in 52450?
I'll pick one example: Opera 11 is not launching but Opera 9.64 works flawlessly. Firefox 2 was working perfect, but for a quite long time Firefox 3.5 was giving headaches with fonts.
So from a testing point of view, a SeaMonkey 2.1 is not SeaMonkey 1.1.17. Opera 9.64 is not Opera 11...etc.

Of course it doesnt mean we can include them in GoldenApps if they work perfect!, but not as an update but as a new entry(having 2 entries: one for Seamonkey 1.1.17 and other entry for SeaMonkey 2.1. That way we can still control regressions thanks to 1.1.17 and we add new apps to the list. The main problem: We would be duplicating the number of apps to be tested, and we dont have the manpower to do it.

So when testers joins the team, we will improve the table with those apps you suggested...but as you can see after some days just 4 r 5 apps were tested. So I doubt we will integrate more apps until the Community changes a little...
Sorry about not testing anything this time. I did my last exam (for this semester) today, so I will probably test some apps on sunday/monday :)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Semrush [Bot] and 4 guests