[Libreoffice-qa] Litmus, a proposal

Bjoern Michaelsen bjoern.michaelsen at canonical.com
Wed Mar 21 14:16:51 PDT 2012

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:26:49PM +0200, Rimas Kudelis wrote:
> For the reference:
> * I have a Litmus TODO list at
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Litmus_TODO. I'd be glad if you
> added bugzilla links and missing entries to it. As I've mentioned
> before, it would be really nice to maintain that TODO in one place
> instead of scattering it in Bugzilla, mailing lists and the wiki.

Yes, manually keeping things in sync is bad. I just added a bugzilla query to
that Litmus page. IMHO bugzilla should be the ultimate reference as it is:
- highly visible
- easy to query/link (and thus to integrate into the wiki/mailing lists)
- does not bit-rot as by querying is always up to date
- keeps tasks in bitesized pieces (you find someone to pick up one single task
  much easier than getting someone to commit himself to a TODO list)

> * Our Litmus source code is available at http://gitorious.org/litmus .
> * As I mentioned on one of the bugs, I don't think Mozilla is
> interested in improving Litmus anymore. They have a new tool just
> behind the corner. This one, I think:
> http://caseconductor.wordpress.com/ . Once they launch it (and from
> the page, it seems they plan to release on 30th this month), we may
> want to have a look at it too.

They already have a staging server, but I cant get into it. Still it might be
an valueable EasyHack, if someone sets up a test instance so we can play with
it, right?

> I don't know, but it may not make sense to keep improving Litmus at that
> point. After all, if they settled for a rewrite, you just have to expect it
> to be so much better than the old tool, right? :)

That might be the case -- we should try out!



More information about the Libreoffice-qa mailing list