John McCabe-Dansted wrote: > I have made a new diff against the svn. > http://gmatht.homelinux.net/xp/svn.diff
yep, i have commited it into trunk. keep the pacthes coming :) > > for bugs without this we should invent something another so we dont > > overpopulate bugzilla. maybe adding links into meta bug for keys test i > > have added > > yestreday or something like that? > > I am thinking that if the bug reports are deficient it may be a good > idea to improve the quality of the bugs keytest generates before > worrying about them too much. It may also be good to still keep the > bugs on the keytest side, so that I can make regression tests out of > them yes > >> Would keycodes be useful for submitting manual bugs as well? > > > > some links to keys is a must. most of the bugs wouldn't be reachible just > > from > > the bakctrace and screenshot. > > I mean bugs that are manually found. If we have the precise keycodes > to reproduce it eliminates some possible ambiguities in the bug > report, i think this is overengineering for normal bug reports >and opens the possibility that these bugs could be > automatically reproduced (e.g. for regression tests) Abdel tried to propose such kind of regression testing. if you feel like to be the main lyx regression tester, why not, but be warned that this will be mainly your project without much help from the others i guess... :) that said it would be actually good to have some automatical regression testing. > Keytest is now quite good at finding the smallest set of keys required > to reproduce. Would it never-the-less be good to have core dumps? if we have steps to reproduce then core dump is not much of use. pavel
