Example SUMMARY file

At the top of the file, please add an entry for yourself and your hardware configuration to the SUMMARY file when you create or modify it. For example:

    Tester: Jon A. Christopher (JAC) <jac8792@tamu.edu>
    	SGI-Motif 1.2.4
    	SGI-LessTif 0.85.2
    Tester: Rick Scott (rws) <rwscott@omnisig.com>
            HP Motif 1.2
            Linux LessTif 0.85.2

The next section should be a keyword summary section. For example from test/label, I've got:

    test1: POSSIBLE FAIL
    test2: PASS
    test3: GEOMETRY
    test4: PASS
    test5: ERROR
    test6: POSSIBLE FAIL

The keywords are, in order of desirability:

- PASS - test is ok in all respects
- GEOMETRY - the test is ok, but has minor geometry differences/problems
- VISUAL - similar to above. The test seems to be ok, but there's a visual defect somewhere.
- POSSIBLE FAIL - The test appears to function like the Motif version, but the output diagnostics are different.
- FAIL - the LessTif version of this test didn't perform like its Motif counterpart.

Please be strict on the tests. There's no sense giving something a PASS at this point, unless it really appears to be 100% correct. However, if one test is a minor modification of another test, and the first test fails for some reason, that doesn't necessarily mean the second test should be given a FAIL. For example, if `test1` fails because of a missing translation, and `test2` is the same test, but uses different fonts, or something, the best way to report this would be:

    test1: FAIL
    test2: PASS (except as noted in test1)

Other possible keywords are:

- UNKNOWN - The purpose if this test is a mystery to the tester. Someone else will have to evaluate this test.
- ERROR - either the Motif or LessTif version of the test wouldn't compile.

Following the keyword section is a detailed summary of each test. You should date and initial each entry, describe what the purpose of the test appears to be, and then describe any problems with the test, either differences from some Motif behavior, or just plain misbehavior of the test itself. For example:

    ======================================================================
    test9:
    JAC Jun 23 1998

    This test was written to demonstrate some problems with the redraw code
    for message boxes.  In particular, if you change the size of a label,
    forcing the message box to increase in size, you sometimes get spurious
    shadows in the larger dialog.  The Motif version does not suffer from
    these problems.

    RWS Jul 4 1998
    This has been fixed.
    ======================================================================

If there are extensive comments about a test in the summary file that no longer apply (i.e. a bug has been fixed), it would be better to move those comments to a separate entry at the end of the file than to delete them entirely. That way we can see what the history of the tests has been, but the top of the file will be fairly clean and easy to skim through.

Finally, and this is a general comment to LessTif developers, if you make changes to a widget, you should re-run the tests for that widget and see if any of the outstanding bugs are fixed. You should update the SUMMARY file to reflect any changes. Also, if you notice anything not already noted in the SUMMARY file, please add an annotation to the SUMMARY file. Also, if you add any new tests, please describe it in the SUMMARY file; sometimes it's impossible weeks later to figure out what a given test program was supposed to be demonstrating.

After you're done testing, please send in your changes to the SUMMARY file to the mailing list, either as a patch or the whole file. (Of course, if you're on the core team, just check it in!)