Hi Frank,
if a CWS is needed and is important it is possible to have it in 2 days.
1 night for automated testing and 1 day for checking the fixed. That
this isn't possible anymore when 30-40 CWS are ready for QA at one day,
this is correct!
So your experience are correct.
Thorsten
Frank Schönheit - Sun Microsystems Germany wrote:
Hi Thorsten,
The time to master isn't a problem currently, I think.
That's not remotely my experience.
See dba31g
(http://eis.services.openoffice.org/EIS2/cws.ShowCWS?Id=7708&OpenOnly=false&Section=History)
for a recent example of a CWS which needed 36 days from "ready for QA"
to "integrated" state (and add a few more days for the milestone to be
finished).
A few more?
dba31a: 26 days
dba31b: 42 days
dba31e: 26 days
dba31f: 13 days
dba31h: 23 days
mysql1: 17 days (and that one was really small)
rptfix04: 9 days (though this number is misleading for other reasons)
dba32a is currently in QA - for 9 days already (which admittedly is also
somewhat misleading, since a regression was fixed meanwhile without
resetting the CWS to "new").
Okay, there were also:
fixdbares: 2 days
dba31i: 7 days
Don't get me wrong, that's not remotely QA's alone responsibility.
Especially the first OOO310 milestones had a lot of delay between CWSes
being approved and being integrated.
But: time-to-master *is* a problem. At least for the majority of CWSes
which I participated in, over the last months.
Ciao
Frank
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
