On 12/01/2010 04:06 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 15:53 -0700, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote: >> On 12/01/2010 03:17 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: >>> I don't really see any reason why *everyone* who's a packager shouldn't >>> also have signed up to be a proven tester by now. I'd like to ask if >>> anyone has a perception that it's a hard process to get involved in, or >>> if they got the impression that they *shouldn't* get engaged in it, or >>> something like that. Maybe we can improve the presentation to make it >>> clear that this really ought to be a very wide-based process. >> >> Well I never read anything specifically about the requirements, however >> based of the name alone, 'proven tester' and relating it to 'proven >> packager' I assumed I'd need to be more experienced before I signed up. > > Ah. I'm not sure if we can change the name...what might be 'friendlier'? > It's certainly not intended to be as 3l33t as provenpackager.
I'm not sure it matters at this point. Though that is why I figured it had a number of hoops to jump through to get the badge... My main contact with Fedora is through the ML. I hate wikis and so rarely visit it, however perhaps there or on the fedoraproject.org site where there are links for getting involved it can be made clearer... For me its entirely the name that made me think I needed some advanced experience. I mean it says proven... I need to prove something. Something more like dependable, regular, approved... or other tester would have jived with me more I think. >> Also, I don't find the tools for updates-testing particularly friendly >> enough yet. I wrote in a thread awhile ago what I thought could be very >> useful to entice people to use updates-testing. I know there are some >> tools which together would allow me to do this, however I'm looking for >> a very simple, comprehensive tool that shows me what is in updates >> testing, what I've installed from there, or create a list of packages >> I'm interested in in updates-testing and never show me otherwise etc... > > fedora-easy-karma makes it very, very easy. Have you tried it? You just > run it, at a console, and it detects all the packages you have installed > from updates-testing, gives you the description of each, and asks you to > provide feedback for each (or skip). It's really a one-stop. It's > described in the proven tester documentation, but really all you need to > know is 'yum install fedora-easy-karma', 'fedora-easy-karma'. It has a > --critpath-only parameter to show only critpath updates, if you're in a > hurry and just want to provide feedback on the most important updates. Well I knew of fedora-easy-karma because of that thread, however I didn't know it did everything I wanted. I thought it allowed you to easily add karma to an update you've installed... Again, even though fedora-easy-karma can give me a list of packages to install and test, this requires me to think 'hey should I run fedora-easy-karma' to see if any packages I'm interested in are available for testing?.. As opposed to the case where updates are made available via PK and I just get notified they are there. So if I can create a list of packages I'm interested in testing, or a list of packages to exclude. And it checks like PK does and informs me when packages need testing, great. Otherwise as lame as it is, I'll rarely think 'I should see if something needs testing'. Unless something I *need* needs testing and I know because I've filed the bug or am otherwise cc'd on it. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
