Hi Volker, all
Tanks for you answer but,
Volker Quetschke wrote:
[...]
> Good question. If you get an answer we should add that to the
<http://tools.openoffice.org/dev_docs/child_workspace_policies.html> CWS policies in tools.openoffice.org.
Ha ! and what if he doesn't get an answer ? Wasn't cws done to ease community developer participation ?
Up to now QA is a black box done in hamburg and that document only says:
"QA will the do the necessary tests and either set the CWS back to "New", if they find some problems, or set the CWS to the state "Nominated", if all tests are passed."
and:
* Nominate a CWS for integration (This should be changed into approve)
The following part is for QA-persons only and can be kept for reference, but a community CWS owner should ask in [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a QA person to take over.
So as Laurent has QA privilege we could consider that he is a QA person :)
At the moment QA is not sufficiently documented to be done by community members. Once community QA is possible this will help to speed up the process.
Hum yes, I guess we (the users) really need to be able to use a thesaurus for 2.0.
Check if all of the following points are fulfilled before setting the CWS to "Nominated": (a few points cut ...)
If someone tells me what is really required to let a community member do a QA for a CWS I'll happiely update that webpage.
I'd be glad to tell you but not sure that sould do the trick ;)
Anyway, what are we doing now ? Is it ok for Laurent to be the QA representative for this cws ?
Kind regards Sophie
-- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.3 - Release Date: 25/04/2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
