[Testingsquad-list] Testing/QA refresh

robert bauer nybauer at gmail.com
Sat Mar 10 16:04:23 EET 2012

There is just support at nemein.com.  Unfortunately, delay is not unusual
these days - all you can do is wait.


On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:25 AM, Iván Gálvez Junquera <ivgalvez at gmail.com>wrote:

> Dear all,
> As we haven't receive any answer from Henri or Niels, it would be probably
> not possible to arrange the IRC meeting  today. We can try next week.
> Rob, do you know any other contact for Maemo.org administration tasks?
> Regards
> 2012/3/6 Iván Gálvez Junquera <ivgalvez at gmail.com>
>> OK, I obviously confused the terms as the QA list of packages at
>> Maemo.org shows votes indicating the voter as "Tester" instead of
>> "Supertester". In fact all the TMO discussion we already had, considered
>> that Supertester would be a different role than Tester. You can see the
>> discussion in this thread <http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=82374>.
>> Correcting my previous email:
>> *Rationale:*
>> Lack of testers and maintainers for applications have derived in a lot of
>> applications getting stuck at Extras Testing  even if they are suitable for
>> promotion.
>> We have even reach a situation in which most applications are not even
>> promoted by their developers to Testing (from Devel) due to the difficulty
>> to promote to Extras. The whole promotion system is perceived as useless.
>> *Solution:*
>> Considering that Maemo community is shrinking, we cannot continue with
>> the actual process. We need to both fix some issues in the whole process of
>> promotion and also grant more administrative privileges to Supertesters.
>> *New members proposed as Supertesters:*
>> These people have been suggested to become new Supertesters:
>> Demolition
>> vi_
>> ammyt
>> ivgalvez
>> Please any one else interested in become a new Superster send an email to
>> this mailing list.
>> *Proposed changes for the promotion process:*
>> This should be the easiest part of the changes that we are proposing.
>> - Promotion of applications from Testing to Extras should be automatic
>> once the requirements are fulfilled. No need of maintainer to actively
>> promoting the application.
>> This will allow orphaned applications to be promoted.
>> - Only one Supertester vote, enough to promote an application.
>> - Five User votes, enough to promote an application.
>> We are running out of man power.
>> All other criteria could be maintained as they are now.
>> Proposed new permissions/abilities for Supertesters:
>> - Add a new developer to maintainer list of any package.
>> - Delete a package from the repository.
>> - Edit bugtracker link.
>> - Ability to promote a package not only from Testing to Extras but also
>> from Devel to Testing.
>> - Ability to downgrade a package from Extras to Testing, and even to
>> Devel.
>> - Ability to prevent automatic promotion of a package from Testing to
>> Extras (to avoid popular but potentially dangerous app to be promoted
>> automatically if reached the number of user votes needed).
>> So we should try to keep IRC conversation on how to achieve those points
>> (already discussed at TMO).
>> Please Henri and Niels, can you provide any preference on when to have
>> that meeting?
>> Regards
>> 2012/3/6 Andrew Flegg <andrew at bleb.org>
>>> 2012/3/6 Iván Gálvez Junquera <ivgalvez at gmail.com>:
>>> >
>>> > If creating a new role (Supertesters) could be problematic from an
>>> > administration point of view, I think we can simply grant more
>>> abilities to
>>> > already existing Testers.
>>> Supertesters already exist. I think you need to be careful not to look
>>> like the current process is misunderstood when proposing changes :-)
>>> > - Only one Tester vote, enough to promote an application.
>>> > - Five User votes, enough to promote an application.
>>> Is there a current role of "tester"? AIUI, there are two roles:
>>>  * Logged in user
>>>  * Supertester
>>> The "Testing Squad" and "testers" are just people, self-organising via
>>> this list, which commit to test multiple applications; even ones
>>> they're not usually interested in. They fit into the first role.
>>> "Supertesters" were introduced to deal with a bottleneck or stalemate
>>> to help get things over the hurdle which were somewhat niche and
>>> needed more testing.
>>> It would probably also be worth shining more light on this topic and
>>> linking up with the apps.formeego.org QA process so that similar
>>> missteps can be avoided for Harmattan apps. Fortunately, bergie &
>>> X-Fade are already intimately involved with the delivery there, but it
>>> might be worth engaging the wider development community who are
>>> affected by this kind of change.
>>> Cheers,
>>> Andrew
>>> --
>>> Andrew Flegg -- mailto:andrew at bleb.org  |  http://www.bleb.org/
>> --
>> Iván Gálvez Junquera
> --
> Iván Gálvez Junquera
> _______________________________________________
> Testingsquad-list mailing list
> Testingsquad-list at garage.maemo.org
> https://garage.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/testingsquad-list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://garage.maemo.org/pipermail/testingsquad-list/attachments/20120310/bd1e4cc4/attachment.htm>

More information about the Testingsquad-list mailing list