What is checkout and checkin in document systems?
Since this is a really, really basic question, and since you have tagged your question with "certification", and since it looks like you are trying to answer a test question somewhere, I'll do better than tell you what they mean. I'll point you to the P8 documentation where you can find out the answers to questions like this and many more in a pretty short period of time:
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/p8docs/v5r1m0/index.jsp
“Check out” and “Check in” functionality is something like elements of SVN system.
Imagine that you have a document. And two users, which has access for editing this document.
And they want to be sure they are working with up-to-date document, and don't prevent each other from editing this document.
So, “Check out” and “Check in” functionality is the thing, which helps them with it. When user1 starts editing the document, he\she checks out it. So, for the system it is some kind of mark that this document is "busy" right now. And after editing, user1 checkins document, and after that all the changes he\she has done are now available for user2.
Since this functionality is very complex, there are o lot of scenarios this functionality can be used.
For example, if two users start editing a document at the same time, and then user1 checkins document one minute before user2, then user2, when trying to checkin document, will the message that his copy is not up-to-date, so he\she has to take new copy, before committing changes of a document.
And, yeap, as WJCarpenter mentioned, you have to work with infocenter to get the full understanding of what checkin\checkout is.
Related
I may have this completely wrong, but I've been searching available documentation and googling for 2 weeks now, and have my head completely wrapped around the axle.
I am trying to use SpecFlow to write a regression test for our site. This means that I want to exercise all the features so that if we inadvertently broke something, it will catch it.
The site is basically an incident reporting portal. The home page has about 50 different buttons, each of which opens up the data entry pages for a different class of incident.
The data entry pages are arranged in a "wizard" fashion, where it starts with a page of general questions, then moves on to a page of more specific questions and so on. The questions are more or less grouped in the classic "who/what/when/where/why" grouping, with one wizard page for each group, so that we don't overwhelm the user with 100 questions presented all at once.
Exactly which pages are needed depends on the particular type of incident. Some incident types have as many as 8 pages, some as few as 3.
Our specifications for each page are framed in BDD style - Given/When/Then. So it is very natural to translate those specifications into SpecFlow features, and I have done that, at least for the first page of general information questions. But the Scenario had about 30+ steps in it.
I have also written another Feature for testing from the home page -
Given I'm logged in on the home page
When I clicked the button for XYZ ticket
Then it opens XYZ ticket
And the General Information page is displayed.
And I can drive that scenario from a table so that I can test as many different incident types as I want.
So far so good.
But now I want to add
And the General Information page requirements are verified
Where the step definition for that last clause would run the whole scenario for the general information page. In other words, I want to use that other scenario that I have written as a subroutine in this one.
(And then I want to go on and do the same for each of the other wizard pages. But let's get the first one first!)
I can't figure out a way to do that. I tried writing the step definition for the above clause to invoke the step definitions of the General Information scenario, e.g.
Given("I am on the General Information page")
When ("I click this checkbox")
Then ("This happens")
You used to be able to do that (although that would still be a lot of repetition). But now that's giving a warning message that function is deprecated and will be removed (and since I've now upgraded, it may already have been removed - I haven't tried it since I upgraded.) The github issues page (https://github.com/SpecFlowOSS/SpecFlow/issues/1733 has a lot of discussion on it, none of which sheds any light on how to do what I'm trying to do. The primary author (SabotageAndi) seemed to be saying "That's a bad thing; don't do that" without really giving any alternative, at least none that I was able to understand.
Can anyone give me a direction for how to accomplish what I'm trying to do?
I want to use that other scenario that I have written as a subroutine
in this one.
You can't reuse scenarios defined in feature files.
The best you can do is create a new Step that reuse already defined steps by calling them direcly (jameswtelfer comment on 31 Jan in github issue you provide).
I am trying to allow users to create issues from a webpage, just like the Issue Collector. The problem is, there are only three templates provided for the collector and none of them are quite right.
What I want is to have three required fields that then combine to become the description. (Similar to how the first template has "what do you like" "what do you not like" which both go in the description)
The problem is there's no obvious way to edit the popup's contents.
Is there any way I can get at the source code of the collector to create my own modified version? Alternatively, if I just copy the html of the popup using inspect element could I create a working clone?
EDIT: Well, I've managed to get at the source code using a java decompiler, but now I haven't got a clue how to put it back together again...
Do you have a paid license for JIRA? If so, Atlassian will give you a copy of the source code.
From their FAQ's
After an order has been placed, how and when can the license key and source be accessed?
Access to your license key(s) and any
applicable source code is provided only after the successful receipt
and processing of your payment. Once payment is received, the Billing
and Technical contact specified on the order can log into their My
Atlassian account, and view all corresponding license keys.
And instructions on how to "put it all back together" :)
Then you are free to customize to your heart's content.
Of course, you'll need to re-customize every time there's an update from Atlassian ...
See also this post on Atlassian's wiki
I am not sure what is better perfomance whise so I ask you guys.
The problem is following:
I have a system where each User gets a certain amount of credit for certain events. So I gave my User an attribute named creditscore that gets altered on those events. Everything works well. But now I want the user to actually see what he did when and how much credit he got for this.
What would be better here:
Saving the whole history in a text attribute and add lines for each event
or
writing an extra model associated with the user and create an instance for every event.
or
or
something way different?
Since there are several events per user per day it would be either a huge text or a huge amount of instances. What would be better looking at website performance.
You absolutely do NOT want to store the history in a text attribute. Management of this will be a nightmare as will querying the data.
You could create a CreditEvent model and store the individual events in there. That would work fine.
However, before you start, check rubygems.org and ruby-toolbox.com to see if someone has already done the hard work. I know of at least one gem that seems to do exactly what you want to do:
https://github.com/merit-gem/merit
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
Suppose I'm designing some SaaS service. And I need to have a function that allow users create sites. User can makes special settings for each site in the admin panel (e.g. design of widget) and gets unique code for install service to his own site.
User story could be:
As a logged user I want to add the new site in the admin panel so that I could configure each instance of widgets separately and could get a unique code for install widget to my own site.
Form
But if I will try to describe this functionality with BDD or GWT (Given When Then) or Gherkin-style, I will face with some trouble. I start from next description:
GIVEN I'm logged into admin panel
AND I'm on "Sites" page
WHEN I click "Add site" button
THEN Pop-up window "Add site" come up
As you can see above realization suppose that site adding will be in pop-up window (e.g. it very important for UX). Pop-up window contains Site URL input field, drop-down control with languages and "Add" and "Cancel" buttons.
And we got a strange scenario which responsible for just pop-up opening. Is it correct? And how can I name this scenario ("Add site's form opening" ??)? Also this scenario has only a one case (when I click - pop-up open). Maybe this scenario not needed at all? I'm confused...
In this case we need to create another scenario when describes:
GIVEN "Add site" pop-up form is opened
WHEN I fill the "Site URL" field
AND click on "Add" button
THEN New site will be create in system
AND I will transfer to my own site's list
How do you think, where do I need to apply a business rules such as:
1) When new site is created a unique code must be generated and consist of minimum 8 characters including numbers and Alphabetical symbols.
2) checks doesn't apply for Site URL input field and user can input a Cyrillic symbols
3) etc?
I have a lot of additional question and hope on the community help!
The thing with BDD is to stay away from implementation details as much as possible. This scenario has multiple implementation details:
GIVEN I'm logged into admin panel AND I'm on "Sites" page
WHEN I click "Add site" button
THEN Pop-up window "Add site" come up
What happens if the "Sites" page becomes "Awesome Site" page or is simply deleted?
What happens if "Add site" is not a button anymore?
What happens if it's not a popup but a redirect occuring
What happens after? Is the value simply in showing the popup? I guess not...
For this specific example, a better approach would be:
GIVEN I'm an authorised administrator
WHEN I enter all the required information for a new site and save it
THEN I should see that site in my own sites list
With this scenario, if your implementation changes, you will only have to change your step definitions, you won't have to change your gherkin. Don't forget that those tests are supposed to explain the Behaviour of the system, not the way it is implemented.
The other questions you have are more related to unit testing in my opinion:
When new site is created a unique code must be generated and
consist of minimum 8 characters including numbers and Alphabetical
symbols => I'd do it at the class level, gherkin would not be
appropriate unless the customer specifically asked for this, then
the condition is "THEN a code having the required characteristics is
generated for that site" and you would have to define "required
characteristics" in a glossary the customer can read and understand.
Checks doesn't apply for Site URL input field and user can input a Cyrillic symbols => again, would put that at the class level en same as for 1. unless the customer wants to be able to read something about it, it should be at the unit level.
I hope that answers your question. I recommend this article by Dan North if you want to have a better idea of how to write better gherkin features.
EDIT 11/13/14
Based on your comments, I suggest we take a step back and describe a way to deal with requirements in your case. I have to tell you that I'm not a BDD expert and am only sharing my own personal experience, for more info on the subject I suggest you get in touch with the guys behind BDD Kickstart and Cucumber.pro where you will find online BDD courses. They will be able to give you lots of information and books to read.
That being said, let's dive into the subject.
The first thing you get is a list of features or stories that, if you follow Mike Cohn's story template would look like:
As a <type of user> I want <to do something> in order to <serve a business purpose>
I personally like to put the business purpose first to make sure we don't skip it in the discussions. You might also not follow that template and that's fine, but remember that it's a good idea to make sure the features you are listing with your customers have a business purpose. If there is no business value behind a feature then what's the point of doing it anyway...
So you do have a list of features/stories described as above. Now for each of these features, there are different cases or scenarios, that's what Dan describes in his article. This is where the Given-When-Then is introduced.
Scenario: Title
Given <some context>
When <there is an event>
Then <something happens>
Each of those scenarios are examples on how this specific feature behaves in different contexts. They are the different acceptance criteria for a specific feature, things the customer described as the expected behaviour of the system. They should be ignorant of any implementation details. So stuff like:
Given I am on page "First page"
When I click "Hello world"
Then I should see "You clicked hello world"
Is wrong for the reasons described prior to this edit.
Let's assume the following feature:
In order to save time when answering clients requests, as a webmaster,
I want to be able to manage the list of websites I am responsible for
Scenarios for this story would be:
Scenario 1: Show a list of websites
GIVEN I am an authorised administrator
AND I am managing several websites
THEN I should see a list of all the sites I manage
Scenario 2: Add website to list
GIVEN I am an authorised administrator
WHEN I enter all the required information for a new site and save it
THEN I should see that site in my own sites list
Scenario 3: Edit website from list
GIVEN I am an authorised administrator
WHEN I edit the site informations
THEN I the changes should be visible in my sites list
...
Now what if you want to go into data validation stuff like "site should have a title" for instance. To me there are two different ways to approach this. You can test that from the user's perspective with a full-stack test or test that there is some validation at the object level.
Let's assume the following scenario:
Scenario: New site has no title
GIVEN I'm an authorised administrator
WHEN I forget to fill in the title for a new site and save it
THEN I should be warned the site is not valid
You can use cucumber or specflow to run this scenario from the UX, therefore using some kind of browse-based proxy to test your app. That is usually slow as it hits the whole system and simulates a real user. It's an option, but I don't think it's the best though. IMO not all tests should be run against the UX and having too many Gherkin features can be a pain to maintain, that's why I prefer focusing on having the happy or critical path (usually I ask myself, where does the money comes from) tested full-stack and put the rest at lower levels.
You can still use Gherkin for these unit tests if you'd like. But that is not mandatory. You only need a way to show your customer you actually have a test for all those specific format controls and validation checks.
That doesn't mean you are not doing BDD anymore, you can still use the given-when-then-should pattern in rspec if you're a rubyist, or any other testing framework you use.
Hope that clarifies all this, let me know if there are any confusing parts...
I think Marc simply deserves the big green tick on this one, thanks to his amazingly thorough answer!
I just wanted to add a few comments.
You don't need to automate all your scenarios.
If you want to capture business requirements in a form that everyone (i.e. including non-tech savvy folks) can understand and Gherkin's Given/When/Then work for you, just go for it. There's nothing forcing you to automate all of your scenarios.
You don't need to automate all your scenarios through the UI.
Your software is made of layers that often respond to similar behaviours, via different interfaces (UI, HTTP, API, ...). Should you want to describe fine-grained business rules (i.e. site name constraints) with automated gherkin scenarios, you could write step definitions that talk directly to your domain layer instead of going through the user interface. That would probably still give you a decent level of confidence.
As a side note, I would recommend not to use Given/When/Then in classic testing frameworks (i.e. those that only devs can see!) if your purpose is to share your tests/requirements with non-tech people.
Have conversations!
Above all, BDD is about better communication: try to talk more, involve your developers (or some of them) earlier in the process so that they gain more knowledge, sooner. Formalising Gherkin scenarios comes in a second phase. Automating them should even be further down your priority list!
Sorry for the simple question but I've searched through the forums for 2 hours.
Goal:
I want to track my websites URLs across the web. I'm current using google analytical to do tracking which is fine for me. But I want to show my users where their links are being clicked when they login to their account.
What's the best way I can do this? I'm using a php backed if that helps. My goal is to provide: how many times their links are clicked and where the URL was clicked from.
Edit: I was hoping somebody else would give you a better hint, but since the question doesn't seem to attract many people I'll try to give you a better answer.
So, breaking down your problem to pieces, you want to trigger a piece of code everytime a page is accessed. You should be able to do a mapping between the page and its owner at one point - when rendering the statistics. If you want to "cut corners" and have a simple solution, you simply insert into your database a new entry describing the event. You seem to be only interested in the number of times it was accessed, so for a specific pageID, you can count how many entries there is, so this data can be computed directly from your database.
Now, the interesting part, figuring out where the visitor comes from. If you take a look at the $_SERVER variable for PHP, documented here, you will see that it contains a lot of interesting information. I think you're mostly interested in 'HTTP_REFERER' which contains
The address of the page (if any) which referred the user agent to the
current page. This is set by the user agent. Not all user agents will
set this, and some provide the ability to modify HTTP_REFERER as a
feature. In short, it cannot really be trusted.
Looking quickly on Stack Overflow I didn't find a more trustable source, so when available, I guess that's the only data you can use.
If you want to make things a bit more robust, you could log the IP address of the visitor and only count 1 visit per day.
So, to recapitulate, you create a table which logs the visits, containing the pageID and referer (optionally the IP address and date to prevent multiple insertions on the same day from the same user if you want to be strict). You add a function call to each page that will record the information of your pageID, maybe the URL or an ID you use internally? and the value of $_SERVER['HTTP_REFERER']. Then, when a user wants to see his stats, you look up every pageID that belongs to him, then pull the count of entries for that page and all the referers.
I hope my explanations are clear. It's definitely not bulletproof, but it's simple and should do the job, and it can be programmed pretty quickly.
Old answer: Piwik (documented here) is pretty similar to Google Analytics. Since you own the database where the data is stored, you could probably extract all the data you want, the way you want it, and manipulate it the way you want without having to depend on someone else (Google).