[Testingsquad-list] Testing/QA refresh

robert bauer nybauer at gmail.com
Mon Mar 26 05:22:07 EEST 2012


Hi,

You, demolition and ammyt should have supertester permissions now (except
for vi_ since I couldn't find his garage account).

Rob

On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 5:50 AM, Iván Gálvez Junquera <ivgalvez at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi Rob,
>
> I meant that even if you are able to grant tester permissions to me and
> more people without the administrator's help, we won't be able to promote
> packages that have already fulfil the criteria and are stacked in testing
> because their original maintainers are missing.
>
> Regards
>
>
> 2012/3/24 robert bauer <nybauer at gmail.com>
>
>> Is there any reason we can't test the packages that still have a
>> maintainer?
>>
>> Rob
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Iván Gálvez Junquera <
>> ivgalvez at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Rob,
>>>
>>> I agree with you, but even though, how could we promote packages without
>>> their original maintainer pushing them?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>> 2012/3/16 robert bauer <nybauer at gmail.com>
>>>
>>>> Niels, Henri,
>>>> Can you please reply?
>>>>
>>>> Ivan,
>>>> I'll add the new supertesters if I can.  It seems that testing refocus
>>>> should start now.  Will have to work out change in package promotion rules
>>>> in the future since it seems Niels doesn't want to bother with maemo
>>>> anymore.
>>>>
>>>> Rob
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, robert bauer <nybauer at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There is just support at nemein.com.  Unfortunately, delay is not
>>>>> unusual these days - all you can do is wait.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rob
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Iván Gálvez Junquera
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Iván Gálvez Junquera
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://garage.maemo.org/pipermail/testingsquad-list/attachments/20120325/ecafecb0/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Testingsquad-list mailing list