[OPEN-ILS-DEV] QA proposals

[Kathy Lussier]

Hi Galen et al.,

Are these guidelines official now?

If so, I would like to update some wiki pages to reflect the new 
requirements:

http://wiki.evergreen-ils.org/doku.php?id=contributing
http://wiki.evergreen-ils.org/doku.php?id=dev:signoff_review_checklist

If anyone knows of other pages that require updating, let me know.

Kathy

On 05/13/2015 05:03 PM, Galen Charlton wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A few concrete proposals for upping our QA game arose from the morning
> hackfest.  Here they are for consideration:
>
> Guidelines for patch submission
> -------------------------------------------------
> [1] Any time a patch adds or alters a stored procedure, pgTAP tests
> that exercise its intended functionality should be included.
>
> [2] A change to database or Perl code that fixes a bug should be
> accompanied by a Perl (t or live_t) or pgTAP regression test – or by a
> statement from the patch author explaining that a test is infeasible
> without significant refactoring.
>
> [3] Bugfix patch commit messages should explain how to test the bug it fixes.
>
> For example: rather than just write a bare "LP#124565: fix Evergreen's
> cat-petting functionality", provide something more like:
>
>    LP#124565: fix Evergreen's cat-petting functionality
>
>    Evergreen does not do an adequate job of petting cats.  To
>    reproduce the problem:
>
>    [1] Bring up an Evergreen OPAC and place a cat
>    in front of it.
>    [2] Observe that a hand appears and makes waving
>    motions a centimeter over the cat.
>    [3] Observe that the cat does not purr.
>    [4] Apply the patch.
>    [5] This time, verify that the hand actually makes contact
>    with the cat.
>    [6] Expected result: the cat purrs.
>
> To patch authors and testers: please provide feedback and +1/0/-1 on
> the three proposed new guidelines for patches.  The first two
> essentially flesh out guidelines from
> <http://wiki.evergreen-ils.org/doku.php?id=dev:contributing:qa&s[]=pgtap>,
> while the third is meant to make it easier for folks to test
> complicated patches.
>
> There were two other proposals that folks have offered to work on:
>
> [A] Create a space for sharing manual test cases, such as the ones
> that MassLNC and PINES have already stockpiled. Champion: Kathy
> Lussier
>
> [B] Institute Test-writing Days, which would be scheduled events for
> folks to write automated tests, similar to the the focused Bug
> Squashing Days. Champion: Liam Whalen.
>
> Regards,
>
> Galen

-- 
Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
klussier at masslnc.org
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier