Closed Bug 810763 Opened 12 years ago Closed 12 years ago

create test file to check proper handling/rejection of certain values input into the Account manager

Categories

(Thunderbird :: Account Manager, defect)

defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED FIXED
Thunderbird 23.0

People

(Reporter: aceman, Assigned: aceman)

References

Details

Attachments

(2 files, 1 obsolete file)

I can do a mozmill test to check correct operation of code added in bug 80855, bug 327812, bug 208628, bug 530142, bug 720199, bug 536768. Let's call it test-account-values.js.
++
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attached patch patch (obsolete) (deleted) — Splinter Review
I try to do bug 80855 in a separate xpcshell test as it does not need the full UI running.
Attachment #716262 - Flags: review?(mconley)
Comment on attachment 716262 [details] [diff] [review] patch Review of attachment 716262 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- These are really well written tests, and they pass for me with flying colours. Thumbs up, I love it. ::: mail/test/mozmill/account/test-account-values.js @@ +5,5 @@ > +/** > + * This test checks proper operation of the account settings panes > + * when certain special or invalid values are entered into the fields. > + * > + * New checks can be added to it as needed. I think this is implied - can probably remove this line.
Attachment #716262 - Flags: review?(mconley) → review+
Attached patch patch v2 (deleted) — Splinter Review
Oh, finally :)
Attachment #716262 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #728645 - Flags: review+
Keywords: checkin-needed
Whiteboard: [please leave open for the remaining test]
Attached patch test for 80855 (deleted) — Splinter Review
The remaining test. Neil, can you think up any invalid IPs/hostnames to add?
Attachment #734291 - Flags: review?(neil)
Attachment #734291 - Flags: feedback?(mconley)
Comment on attachment 734291 [details] [diff] [review] test for 80855 Seems reasonable, but do you want to add things like 127.1 and 10.100.1000 as valid extended IP addresses?
Attachment #734291 - Flags: review?(neil) → review+
These will not currently pass. I see these are valid as even 'ping' in linux accepts them fine. I remember we discussed them in bug 80855. We have bug 809609 to add support of these. We can update the test in that bug.
Blocks: 809609
Keywords: checkin-needed
Whiteboard: [please leave open for the remaining test]
Comment on attachment 734291 [details] [diff] [review] test for 80855 Those are some good looking tests! +1!
Attachment #734291 - Flags: feedback?(mconley) → feedback+
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Flags: in-testsuite+
Keywords: checkin-needed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → Thunderbird 23.0
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Creator:
Created:
Updated:
Size: