bulia byak wrote:
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Vangelis Katsikaros <vkatsikaros@...1244...> wrote:
A friend suggested this too some hours ago, and I 've playing with it all this time.
It does work as advertised and it's excellent for testing. I've been able to make inkscape run and do several GUI driven things.
I think it is an excellent and long overdue idea. Inkscape badly needs more automated testing if it doesn't want to die a slow death of bit rot and bug infestation.
+1
If you can set up such a testing framework and commit it as part of the Inkscape codebase, and more importantly make it at least a part of "make check" (and ideally, it should be run automatically on every commit!) it would be a great step forward. Working on that does not require much familiarity with Inkscape code.
I'll do part of it since I have to setup some test cases. I'll now try to setup an environment for sikuli testing.
In general, after Jon's and bulia's replies we have 3 options: 1) inkscape's verbs 2) dogtail: a11y bindings 3) screenshot/GUI driven (sikuli or other if they exist)
Some first thoughts (with no hands on experience with 1 and 2): Depending where a bug is (for example it could be in the verb code) each choice could mask different kinds of bugs. So I don't think that only one should be used. However, this increases administration/coordination.
Vangelis __________________________________________________ ×ñçóéìïðïéåßôå Yahoo!; ÂáñåèÞêáôå ôá åíï÷ëçôéêÜ ìçíýìáôá (spam); Ôï Yahoo! Mail äéáèÝôåé ôçí êáëýôåñç äõíáôÞ ðñïóôáóßá êáôÜ ôùí åíï÷ëçôéêþí ìçíõìÜôùí http://mail.yahoo.gr