Reply on:
How are we planning to test this? We have seen bugs in obscure web
sites which use the name of a new DOM property for example, but it seems
to me like there is no easy way for somebody to verify that adding such
a property doesn't break any popular website, even, since sometimes the
bug
On 8/12/12 5:51 AM, Robert Kaiser wrote:
I think QA should do some exploratory testing of major new features as
time allows, but just verifying existing test cases that often are
running automatically anyhow isn't a good use of time, I guess.
This is something that I think could very much be h
On 2012-08-13 21:08:04 +, Geo Mealer said:
Instead I'd define (formally or otherwise) three tiers:
1) Critical fixes. These need verification + additional testing.
2) Untested uncritical fixes. These have no automated tests. These
should get verification if time allows.
3) Tested critical
On 2012-08-10 20:41:30 +, Anthony Hughes said:
I, for one, support this idea in the hypothetical form. I'd like to get
various peoples' perspectives on this issue (not just QA).
Like Robert says elsewhere, manually running a testcase that's already
in automation doesn't make a huge amoun
On Friday, August 10, 2012 1:41:30 PM UTC-7, Anthony Hughes wrote:
> Sorry, this should have went to dev-platform...
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Anthony Hughes"
>
> To: "dev-planning"
>
> Cc: dev-qual...@lists.mozilla.org
>
> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 1:40:15 PM
>
On Sunday, August 12, 2012 5:51:43 AM UTC-7, Robert Kaiser wrote:
> Jason Smith schrieb:
>
> > Note - I still think it's useful for a QA driver to look through a set
>
> > of bugs fixed for a certain Firefox release, it's just the process would
>
> > be re-purposed for flagging a bug for needing
Does 3g/calls/sms work on the ns4g yet?
On Tuesday, August 7, 2012 8:42:59 AM UTC-4, mohamme...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
>
>
> I would be able to help you out. Please link me to the build that you
> compiled for ns4g.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Wajee
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, April 3, 201
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 11:40 PM, Anthony Hughes wrote:
I'm commenting only from the point of view of developing Web-exposed
features into Gecko. I don't have sufficient experience to comment on
QA practices as they relate to Firefox UI development, etc.
> Does verifying as many fixes as we do r
On 2012/08/13 17:32, Neil wrote:
Masayuki Nakano wrote:
On 2012/08/13 4:57, Neil wrote:
it seems as if you can't make the wheel scroll more slowly any more?
Currently, yes. The reason for not supporting slower scrolling isn't
technical reason. It needs some additional code. E.g., 0.5px scro
Masayuki Nakano wrote:
On 2012/08/13 4:57, Neil wrote:
it seems as if you can't make the wheel scroll more slowly any more?
Currently, yes. The reason for not supporting slower scrolling isn't
technical reason. It needs some additional code. E.g., 0.5px scroll
isn't supported by current ES
10 matches
Mail list logo
