Hello, Iván and others, Please include also my project: NWTBible http://maemo.org/packages/package_instance/view/fremantle_extras-testing_free_armel/nwtbible/1.3/ which also depends on libwebkit-1.0-1: http://maemo.org/packages/package_instance/view/fremantle_extras-testing_non-free_armel/libwebkit-1.0-1/1.0-svn41137-18/
Both app and library are lacking enough votes for promoting because userbase is limited. If someone from testing squad can install app and test that functionality is working, i would be happy if it will be promoted to extras. Thanks Best regards, Ilya Skriblovsky 2012/8/14 Iván Gálvez Junquera <[email protected]> > Hi all, > > I'm sharing the spreadsheet > <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AubSh-ONkzPndFN3ZFBKMUJOb05tdV9Ub3oyaHFKZ0E&output=html>I'm > using to keep track of applications ready for promotion, the status and > whose developers I've contacted with. > > As previously agreed, all applications with enough votes and free of > suspicious issues that are unmaintained will be auto-promoted. However we > will need someone to do the promotion and, as you already know, our > maintenance muscle is right now almost non existent. > > In order to start the migration to self sustained infrastructure process, > the Council contacted with X-Fade a few weeks ago, trying to obtain some > administrative rights over current infrastructure. This way we would be > able to improve our current maintenance status and start gathering a > working group for administration tasks. > > He agreed to grant the administrative rights to the repository web > interface to merlin1991, as a first step in the handover process. Now we > are just waiting him to actually give merlin1991 that permission so he > could start doing some maintenance tasks on Fremantle repositories. > > Once we have at least one administrator we could start tasks like this one > for promotion of packages. > > Regards > 2012/7/19 Iván Gálvez Junquera <[email protected]> > >> Hi all, >> >> So far, I have contacted with the maintainers of the following >> applications: >> >> - *Wizard-mounter* >> - Cloudy Blue Sky Theme >> - Arabic localization (free) >> - D-THEME Futureal >> - *Exult Digital Audio* >> - LastGo >> - Granule >> - Hdrcapture >> - *Lowlight *-> maintainer unreachable (no longer working at Nokia) >> - lockdaemon >> - Situare >> - D-THEME BlackAndRed >> - *N900-i18n-zh_HK* >> - *pebble-do *-> promotion rejected by maintainer >> - woller >> - PSFreedom >> - grr >> - tvcplayer >> - InfoZIP's Zip >> - *nextalarm* >> - K9 Call >> - Pidgin Extra Protocols (Bonjour and Sametime) >> - Noor Quran Viewer >> - Multilist >> - mprayertime >> - *qTraductor* >> - tvbgone >> - Columbus Core Plugins >> - Columbus Navigation Toolkit >> - youtube-dl >> - DrLaunch >> - Wordpress >> - mbarcode-plugins-all >> - SyncEvolution >> - papertoss >> - clocksn900 >> - *Crochik MyContacts* >> - SomePlayer >> - SomeCover >> - CSSU Tuner >> - Series Watcher >> - *GPS Track Logger Widget* -> maintainer unreachable (no longer >> working at Nokia) >> - *Neverball* >> >> Applications in bold green have been promoted to Extras, for the rest I >> haven't received answer so I assume (except for a few of the last emails >> recently sent) that they are unmaintained. >> >> Most of them (as previously discussed) will be autopromoted. >> >> And still working on it... >> >> Regards >> >> 2012/5/10 Iván Gálvez Junquera <[email protected]> >> >>> Thanks for the feedback, I'll try to contact all the maintainers for >>> packages that don't present any doubt. For those without active maintainers >>> we could then ask X-Fade to promote them. >>> >>> Regards. >>> >>> 2012/5/9 Marcin M. <[email protected]> >>> >>> I didn't experience any problem with qt-components. Even MeeGo apps such >>>> as Allegro (Polish app) work alright. >>>> I only got segmentation fault with widgets gallery. >>>> -- >>>> Marcin >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2012/5/9 Timo Härkönen <[email protected]> >>>> >>>>> Hi >>>>> >>>>> 2012/5/9 Iván Gálvez Junquera <[email protected]> >>>>> >>>>>> I don't know if you finally received the complete list as it seems >>>>>> that the message (due to the size of attached file) needed moderation. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yeah. it came through. >>>>> >>>>> Most of them seem to be clear cases that could be promoted without >>>>> further action. Might be good idea to hold the ones that have any negative >>>>> votes back for further examination or remove from testing in case of clear >>>>> issues. If some apps use the compatibility plugin then they use it. should >>>>> work either way. afaik it's only a symlink anyway. otah it should be there >>>>> for people who are not using cssu. We should not force people who are >>>>> installing applications from extras to install cssu. But yeah, >>>>> qt-components needs some more attention/testing. If it is not maintained >>>>> then imo it needs a new maintainer before even thinking about promoting >>>>> it. >>>>> >>>>> Timo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2012/5/7 Iván Gálvez Junquera <[email protected]> >>>>>> >>>>>>> OK, here is the complete list of applications that can be promoted. >>>>>>> I still need to add the TMO relevant threads. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2012/5/7 Iván Gálvez Junquera <[email protected]> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I supposed that the criteria for promoting a package had already >>>>>>>> changed to only require one tester vote (or was it two votes?). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Anyway I can see packages I voted for, that should be enabled to be >>>>>>>> promoted, as they have even two Tester votes, and yet are waiting to >>>>>>>> receive more votes. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In the meantime I'm collecting information about applications ready >>>>>>>> for promotion. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please see the attached spreadsheet containing the details for >>>>>>>> applications that need their maintainers to push them into Extras. At >>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>> moment it only contains applications from the first QA page, I'll add >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> rest after receiving some feedback. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You can see that some applications, even with the criteria >>>>>>>> fulfilled, don't have many positive votes or have some negative votes >>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>> might worth to investigate. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have included contact data for maintainers, but I have realized >>>>>>>> that most of them simply don't allow PM messages in their profiles, so >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> question is: how to contact with them?. I would also like to add the >>>>>>>> relevant TMO thread links and contact with the authors both by PM (or >>>>>>>> automatic message) and with a comment in TMO. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2012/4/27 Timo Härkönen <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 27. huhtikuuta 2012 21.04 robert bauer <[email protected]>kirjoitti: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The threshold for promotion was already decided after mailing list >>>>>>>>>> and tmo threads. I don't want to revisit that issue again except to >>>>>>>>>> implement it. We didn't decide what to do with packages that have no >>>>>>>>>> maintainer so we can discuss that some more. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ok. no need to go back to it but imo we need to make a bit more >>>>>>>>> noise about the solution and make it happen. Is the solution >>>>>>>>> documented to >>>>>>>>> wiki or something that we can refer to? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As for the cases where packages are suck because there is no >>>>>>>>> action from maintainer possibilities basically are (imo) automatic >>>>>>>>> promotions, kicking them out of testing or the middle ground where we >>>>>>>>> hand >>>>>>>>> pick packages that get promoted or kicked out (requires too much >>>>>>>>> manual >>>>>>>>> labor imo). All solutions have their up and down sides. Personally I'm >>>>>>>>> still in favour of the automatic promotion. Say if the package has the >>>>>>>>> needed votes and no action from the maintainer within a week it geta >>>>>>>>> promoted. The maintainer could stop the promotion by down voting the >>>>>>>>> package. it that case other votes would be totally ignored. That might >>>>>>>>> cause more buggy stuff getting through but I don't see how that is >>>>>>>>> worse >>>>>>>>> than the current stale mate. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That would still leave the final big issue - lack of testers. I'd >>>>>>>>> actually like to see a bi-weekly IRC testing meeting that someone >>>>>>>>> proposed >>>>>>>>> at some point. Basically something like two hours of chatting on irc >>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>> going through the queue. Would at least help to get the more >>>>>>>>> problematic >>>>>>>>> packages to test get through. IMO stuck queue thing needs to be >>>>>>>>> resolved >>>>>>>>> first befere this kind of meeting would make sense. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -Timo >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 6:24 AM, Timo Härkönen < >>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 27. huhtikuuta 2012 12.51 robert bauer <[email protected]>kirjoitti: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:00 AM, robert bauer < >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I think Niels should be available to discuss. So ping him >>>>>>>>>>>>> again and try to move this along. Thanks. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Rob >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Has there been discussion yet with Niels? Please let me know >>>>>>>>>>>> if there hasn't and I will push. Contact me if there are problems >>>>>>>>>>>> (other >>>>>>>>>>>> than the amount of testing to be done). >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Rob >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think the QA discussion got buried by the OBS thing so we need >>>>>>>>>>> to reactivate this topic. How about if we collect all the provided >>>>>>>>>>> input/ideas for a solution to the QA problem put them to the wiki, >>>>>>>>>>> send a >>>>>>>>>>> mail adventizing it to -developers, -community and a post on tmo. >>>>>>>>>>> and set a >>>>>>>>>>> date for a irc meeting to try get decicions made and things rolling >>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>> this? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Although the OBS move will eventually have an affect on QA as >>>>>>>>>>> well but that doesn't help in the short term so we need to come up >>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>> something.. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -Timo >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 6:19 AM, Iván Gálvez Junquera < >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok Rob, thanks. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2012/3/26 robert bauer <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is just [email protected]. 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 < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2012/3/6 Iván Gálvez Junquera <[email protected]>: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > 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:[email protected] | >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.bleb.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Iván Gálvez Junquera >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Iván Gálvez Junquera >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Testingsquad-list mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://garage.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/testingsquad-list >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Iván Gálvez Junquera >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Iván Gálvez Junquera >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Iván Gálvez Junquera >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>> Testingsquad-list mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>> https://garage.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/testingsquad-list >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Iván Gálvez Junquera >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Iván Gálvez Junquera >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Iván Gálvez Junquera >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Testingsquad-list mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://garage.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/testingsquad-list >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Testingsquad-list mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://garage.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/testingsquad-list >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Iván Gálvez Junquera >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Iván Gálvez Junquera >> > > > > -- > Iván Gálvez Junquera > > _______________________________________________ > maemo-community mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community > >
_______________________________________________ maemo-community mailing list [email protected] https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
