Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Question about status of this project, how about adding test script? #252

Closed
kittiu opened this issue Jun 27, 2019 · 9 comments
Closed

Question about status of this project, how about adding test script? #252

kittiu opened this issue Jun 27, 2019 · 9 comments
Assignees
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@kittiu
Copy link
Member

kittiu commented Jun 27, 2019

Hi all, cc @max3903

Sorry for the mixed question. I am interested in this project, and want to help out in some way. When I start to migrate module "fieldservice_recurring", but notice that most modules has no test script, and so, with zero knowledge in this field it is hard to do migration.

I wonder if it is a good idea for your team if I start by adding test scripts and/or README to learn more about functionality. But that would need your team guideline, i..e, tell me the right use cases and user steps...

May be I can summarize as questions here,

  1. Is the functionality of this project mature? Work done in real customer projects?
  2. Any resources that can help me understand this field-service better?
  3. Is it good idea to start contribute by adding test scripts?

Thank you.

@max3903 max3903 added this to the 12.0 milestone Jun 27, 2019
@max3903 max3903 self-assigned this Jun 27, 2019
@max3903
Copy link
Member

max3903 commented Jun 27, 2019

@kittiu

You will find some documentation here #1.

Adding tests would be a great contribution and allow us to raise the development status from beta to stable.

  1. Yes and yes. We are starting to implement those modules for different customers without any changes.
  2. You can count on @wolfhall, @osi-scampbell and @max3903 to the extent limited by our schedule. I can't speak for @brian10048 .
  3. Yes! @osi-scampbell and I can review them.

Thank you for joining.

@brian10048
Copy link
Contributor

I can help answer questions and improve the README documentation. This should help @kittiu in writing the test scripts.

Some demo data would also be a good addition related to this cause.

@kittiu
Copy link
Member Author

kittiu commented Jun 28, 2019

Hi everyone,

Thanks for the kind response. @brian10048 I can focus on the fieldservice_recurring first, if you could add more detailed steps in readme, that would be great. But not to worry, I would also read through the code and ask more questions if I don't understand. ;)

@kittiu
Copy link
Member Author

kittiu commented Jul 3, 2019

Hi everyone,

As @brian10048 mentioned about data. I do agree, as fieldservice (base) seem to relate to many master data. May I ask if it is possible for me to get some good master data (I also not sure what will make sense), may be as .csv or .xml, or even database with removed transaction.

But if not possible, I can also create some fake data, i.e., Territory 1, Territory 2, etc to work with.

If we can have the good data, it is great, if not no problem.

Thanks

@kittiu
Copy link
Member Author

kittiu commented Jul 3, 2019

Hi, given the above question still valid. I just continue working on #257
I am adding test for fsm_equipment,

  • What are the good sample of equipment's stage ?
  • Should it be data like in order's stage, or it should be demo only ?

@brian10048
Copy link
Contributor

@kittiu @max3903
Can we close this issue and continue tracking progress in #278?

@max3903
Copy link
Member

max3903 commented Dec 11, 2019

👍

@kittiu
Copy link
Member Author

kittiu commented Dec 11, 2019

Yes and sorry of not having time to follow up.

@brian10048
Copy link
Contributor

Not a problem @kittiu. Thanks for the work you have done here. We welcome it anytime

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants