Update on 1.2 testing

Michelle D'Souza michelle.dsouza at utoronto.ca
Wed Apr 14 14:30:42 UTC 2010

On 13-Apr-10, at 11:40 PM, Colin Clark wrote:

> Would it not be sufficient to write a unit test that shows the bug  
> without the patch and passes once the patch had been applied?

Hi Colin,

Interestingly it was actually an existing test that caught the bug.  
Which is good but points to a hole in our infrastructure. We depend on  
people to run the automated tests instead of the tests being run upon  
commit or during the nightly build. We've known that this is an issue  
for a long time but never quite found the time to rectify it. So this  
time around *4* of us - the bug fixer, the two independent reviewers  
(I'm one of them) and the QA tester didn't run the unit tests. And all  
of us like unit tests and generally run them - but we were crunched  
and rushed so it slipped through. Luckily that final testing did catch  
the slip and the test is passing again with the patch Justin created.


Michelle D'Souza
Software Developer, Fluid Project
Adaptive Technology Resource Centre

More information about the fluid-work mailing list