[Development] Proposal - QtSerialPort graduation from the Playground

[Laszlo Papp]

On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:05 PM, Knoll Lars <Lars.Knoll at digia.com> wrote:

> From an API perspective it looks pretty good. I'm not an expert on serial
> ports, but from what I recall from the time I dealt a little with them
> (must be 10 years ago or so…) it looks pretty complete as well. S o with
> the changes proposed on the mailing list I believe the API is good to go :)
>

Getting in: https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,45640


>  * Could you please fix the copyright headers to out standard form
> (simply check a header from qtbase)?
>

https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,45879


> * Could you give the module the same structure as the other Qt modules,
> esp. with regards to where the source for the docs live? Please check
> http://qt-project.org/wiki/Creating-a-new-module-or-tool-for-Qt and make
> sure the module follows the guidelines.
>

https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,45882


> * I'm fine calling the module just QtSerialPort instead of
> QtAddonSerialPort to simplify naming. I doubt we'll get conflicts in the
> future because of that.
>

https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,45883


> * The double namespace is a requirement we have removed, a simple
> "namespace QtSerialPort" is enough.
>

https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,45884


>  And a question: There's no auto tests. I know that testing serial ports
> can't really be done in an automated fashion, but is there anything we can
> do to cover the module?
>

Good question; we discussed this issue before. This is unfortunately also a
real problem for us to test the module with all the combinations for each
factor. It requires (semi-)manual testing and hence a bit of effort. I see
two ways to improve the automated test coverage:

* I requested the QtMock module in April for a playground initiation to
extend the test capability of the Qt Project for such cases like this, but
I did not get around to it, unfortunately, to get anything done for that
yet.

* The CI machines could be using a loopback cable, and test it that way. It
would be even better to use a pandaboard or raspberry pi (with gserial in
that case). The board could be used for receiving and sending data back for
instance, but this requires a special hardware setup.

Perhaps, there are other alternatives to address this, but these have just
come to my mind for the moment.

Laszlo
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20130126/fd9d6131/attachment.html>