Cooperative Bug Isolation for Fedora Core 5

[Will Woods]

On Mon, 2006-06-26 at 13:29 -0500, Ben Liblit wrote:
> Jim Cornette wrote:
> > Is this similar to what the Fedora Automated Test Suite [...] aims to
> > accomplish?
> 
> Both share the goal of making software suck less.  :-) 

Ha! Right on.

> The key difference is that the Fedora Automated Test Suite uses an
> explicit, fixed, human-designed battery of tests.  CBI treats regular
> daily usage as the "test suite", where any run that ends in failure
> (e.g. crash) is taken as an example of a failed test.

Well said! I'd say CBI does interactive testing (with nicely automated
results reporting), while the automated test suite is non-interactive.

> These are complementary approaches, of course.  A well-designed 
> automated test suite is extremely valuable but can be hard to create. 
> CBI offers a different view of things, with less developer steering and 
> more focus on ordinary day-to-day usage.

This is brilliant. I'd love to get you guys involved more directly in
Fedora testing. What can we do to help?

-w
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20060627/293da37c/attachment-0001.sig>