----- Original Message ----- From: "Adam Williamson" <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> To: "For testing and quality assurance of Fedora releases" <test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2013 3:22:18 PM Subject: Re: update some testcases On Tue, 2013-01-08 at 03:02 -0500, Kamil Paral wrote: > >> I'm using the terms in the sense I see them most often used. But maybe >> different terms could be less confusing. Adam, do you want to comment >> on terminology? >That's how I've been doing it so far. It feels like we could somehow >come up with better names, but no-one has yet :) >The dialog which pops up after you select disks for installation - and >either says 'You have enough space, you're all set!' or 'You don't have >enough space, you need to free some up!' - is the branch point for >'Guided' vs. 'Custom' install. Both versions of that dialog have a >checkbox whose label says something about 'Customize the layout'. If you >check that checkbox and then proceed from the dialog, you are now in the >'custom partitioning' flow. If you leave the checkbox unchecked and >proceed from the dialog, you are now in the 'guided partitioning' flow. >If you had enough space, and you don't check the box, then you are now >done with partitioning, there is no further screen in the flow - but we >still refer to it as the 'guided partitioning' flow. >As kparal says, the 'autopart' algorithm can actually be invoked from >each path. 'Guided partitioning' always uses the 'autopart' algorithm to >actually create the final partition layout. In 'custom partitioning' you >can choose to use it, by clicking the 'Create partition layout >automatically' text Kamil mentioned. Or you can choose not to use it, >and to actually create each partition manually. I probably wouldn't want >to try and use the term 'manual partitioning' to mean 'custom >partitioning without using the 'autopart' link', that seems >unnecessarily confusing - really, 'custom partitioning' is still 'custom >partitioning' whether you clicked the 'autopart' link or not. Hi Adam,the" custom mode" and the "autopart mode" is clear enough for me .What confused me is that I thought we are in autopart mode as long as we change nothing and just do default things, we are in custom mode the moment we change sth.That's why I say we can change mode for several times during one install. "No, that's still custom mode. As long as you're in the custom dialog,you're in custom mode. The 'Create partition layout automatically'function is just a little helper."make it clear at once,and I don't feel confused now:)thanks for your comment. > > > >In the original text there is also: > > ># Repeat the test, selecting a non-English keyboard map and > > >entering a passphrase which would not be input the same on an > > >English keyboard map > > >Personally I would erase this one, I'm not a fan on > > >"repeat-several-times" test cases. We can explicitly say the > > >password _might not_ be set using an English keymap. It's then up > > >to >people to choose. In several test runs we will receive the same > > >result (multiple keymaps tested) with less time invested. > > > > For this one ,I'm a little disagree with you.If we do not > > highlight"selecting a non-English keyboard map"，we QA may tends to > > use English keyboard map only. > > for example,I am an Chinese,but I would just do the default English > > install for all the testcases,if there is no special saying. > > If something is not explicitly stated in the test case, people should > be free to do it as they see fit. We might set up some "testing > introduction" page and describe these principles. But I agree with > you, in order to encourage using different keymaps, we can explicitly > say it's allowed. That's why I proposed: > "We can explicitly say the password _might not_ be set using an > English keymap." So the reason this case is as it is right now is that when the issue of keymap problems first came up, I considered writing separate 'keymap' test cases, but it seemed a bit artificial: the 'non-US keymap encrypted partitioning test case' would have been a copy/paste of the encryption test case, but with 'use a non-US keymap' added. Seemed a bit silly, and it didn't seem that hard just to add it into the existing test case. While you're testing encryption, you may as well make sure it works with a non-US keymap too. The reason for saying to run the test twice, once with a US keymap and once without, is to make it easier to tell whether a failure is due to the use of a non-US keymap or not: if you just use a non-US keymap, and you get a failure, it's hard to know whether it's a general failure, or because you're using a non-US keymap. If you run the test twice, it should make it relatively clear what causes any failure. There are more efficient ways of doing things, but they're harder to explain in a test case. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
