On 05/23/2014 02:58 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2014-05-22 at 20:22 +0530, Amita Sharma wrote:
Thanks for working on this. I'm curious as to the context: is this
really a Fedora-level effort, or is it more 389-ds upstream-level? What
are the other test plans you are planning to work on? Thanks!
Hi Adam,
I have updated http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Test_Cases with
389 test cases section as you suggested.
Thanks for that! But I think the category name might need to be changed.
The name part has to match the name of the source package - that's how
Bodhi knows which test cases to show for which updates, it looks in the
wiki for a category called "Package_(source_package_name)_test_cases".
Thanks for the reply Adam
I accept your comment , it should be "Package_389-ds-base_test_cases"
It looks like there is a '389-ds' package, but it only contains a couple
of directories and some dependencies - that is, it's basically a
metapackage. It very rarely gets updated, so we don't want the test
cases associated with that package, because then people testing updated
389-ds bits won't see them.
It looks like the 'real' 389 source packages are:
389-ds-base
389-ds-console
389-console
389-admin
389-admin-console
389-adminutil
389-dsgw
There are many ::
===============
389-ds-base-1.2.11.15-33.el6_5.x86_64.rpm
389-ds-base-libs-1.2.11.15-32.el6_5.x86_64.rpm
-- These rpms are for the basic Directory Server Instance.
389-admin-1.1.34-1.el6.x86_64.rpm
389-admin-console-1.1.8-1.el6.noarch.rpm
389-admin-console-doc-1.1.8-1.el6.noarch.rpm
389-admin-debuginfo-1.1.34-1.el6.x86_64.rpm
389-adminutil-1.1.17-1.el6.x86_64.rpm
389-adminutil-debuginfo-1.1.17-1.el6.x86_64.rpm
389-adminutil-devel-1.1.17-1.el6.x86_64.rpm
--- These are for Admin Server.
389-console-1.1.7-1.el6.noarch.rpm
389-ds-console-1.2.7-1.el6.noarch.rpm
389-ds-console-doc-1.2.7-1.el6.noarch.rpm
--- These are for Directory Server Console
389-ds-base-debuginfo-1.2.11.15-32.el6_5.x86_64.rpm
389-ds-base-devel-1.2.11.15-33.el6_5.x86_64.rpm
--- These are devel and debuginfo rpms
I don't know enough about 389 to know which test cases should be
associated with which source package, but I guess you do. So create
"Package_(source_package_name)_test_cases" categories for each source
package for which you have relevant test cases, and put the right test
cases in the right categories :)
So here again As you said "REAL RPMS" are only few and I don't think we
should categories the test cases on the basis of rpms because one or
more rpms are dependency rpms, serving single purpose.
Rather, we can have 2 major categories
1. 389-ds-base (which will cover various features of DS like password
policy, SSL etc.)
2. 389-console (which will cover admin and console functionality)
Created http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_389_Directory_Server
and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_389_Directory_Server
That's the same link twice - is that what you meant? I guess you'll also
convert the other tests from the test plan page into separate test
cases?
awww.. I meant
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_389_Directory_Server and
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Package_389_test_cases :P
My aim is to put some efforts in fedora QA, 389 is my work area so I am
starting up with it.
Thank you very much!
Thanks :)
Also I want to know if I can organize a test day for 389 with community
testers?
Absolutely, that would be great - Mike already replied, and he can help
you with the organization.
Yeah.. I got his mail.
Thanks & Regards,
Ami
--
test mailing list
test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
