QA meeting

Line 21: Line 21:
* Developer's karma and tester's karma should be incorporated so that a "developer with high karma would be able to push packages through the process faster, and a high rolling tester would be able keep bugs open and classified as critical in case of disagreement."
* Developer's karma and tester's karma should be incorporated so that a "developer with high karma would be able to push packages through the process faster, and a high rolling tester would be able keep bugs open and classified as critical in case of disagreement."
* Bugtracker field should be a blocker ? what about background packages ?
* Bugtracker field should be a blocker ? what about background packages ?
-
* What to do with CLI apps.
+
* What to do with CLI apps ?

Revision as of 11:27, 10 November 2009

QA Meeting Agenda

Please place the things you wish to discuss at the QA meeting on IRC below.

Meeting details

  • IRC: irc.freenode.org
  • Channel: #maemo-meeting
  • Time: Tuesday, November 10th, 14:30 UTC

Agenda

  • QA is good.
  • The criteria are a good start, but need tweaks
  • The packages UI needs some streamlining for testers.
  • As a tester, a better reminder of the checklist when checking would be good. I also like the ease with which I can give feedback.
  • As a developer, I don't *think* I want to be constrained with "release early, release often" when fixing bugs or introducing new small features.
  • We need a mechanism to preserve karma or reset it to zero.
  • Discuss the possibility of PPAs or personal repositories.
  • specific bug report should always be required to block a package from entering Extras.
  • Developer's karma and tester's karma should be incorporated so that a "developer with high karma would be able to push packages through the process faster, and a high rolling tester would be able keep bugs open and classified as critical in case of disagreement."
  • Bugtracker field should be a blocker ? what about background packages ?
  • What to do with CLI apps ?