QA meeting

(Replacing page with '#REDIRECT [Bugsquad/QA_meeting]')
Line 1: Line 1:
-
'''QA Meeting Agenda'''
+
#REDIRECT [Bugsquad/QA_meeting]
-
 
+
-
Please place the things you wish to discuss at the QA meeting on IRC below.
+
-
 
+
-
'''In the next meeting...'''
+
-
* I want to discuss how to integrate Fennec as 3rd party app into bugs.maemo.org
+
-
**Do we need ttis integration? Why bugzilla.mozilla.org is not enough?
+
-
**What are alternatives?
+
-
**There is already [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=526798 an open bug for this issue]. Feel free to add your thoughts!
+
-
*How to build a bridge between bugs.maemo.org and [http://maemo.org/packages/repository/qa/fremantle_extras-testing/ the package voting system]
+
-
**As somebody fills bug reports normaly only if I found a bug during normal daily use it would be nice to have a link to the application packge to vote for.
+
-
--[[User:jukey|jukey]] 19:18, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
+
-
 
+
-
'''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 ?
+
-
* Allow people to vote multiple time.
+
-
'''Actionable items'''
+
-
 
+
-
1. We recommend lowering acceptable karma from 10 to 5.<br>
+
-
2. Thumbs down requires a comment as well.<br>
+
-
3. Testers should follow the checklist closely so it is clear what the testing criteria are. <br>
+
-
4. Positive package karma gets preserved for bug fixes, cosmetic changes.<br>
+
-
5. Allow people to cast more than one vote for a package.<br>
+
-
6. App authors should be *prevented* from thumbing up own app and that a maintainer thumbing it down removes it from the QA list
+
-
7. PPAs are bad.
+
-
8. Without an application, libraries do not go through the QA process.
+
-
tester logs in, reviews app metadata on web, installs via .install, tests and then votes ;-)
+
-
 
+
-
 
+
-
'''Wishlist'''
+
-
 
+
-
1. Approval interface available in Application Manager.
+
-
2. User clicks a series of checkboxes, the app gets promoted automatically.
+

Revision as of 19:55, 11 November 2009

  1. REDIRECT [Bugsquad/QA_meeting]