On Apr 30, 2009, at 21:46, Andrew Zabolotny wrote: > From Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:13:33 +0300 > Quim Gil <quim....@nokia.com> wrote: > >> The question is how to check and enforce them. What can be automated >> and what can be evaluated via testers feedback. > Since Maemo is a community project, QA could be done by the community > as well. As I see it, some person (or all developers?) is made part of > the QA team; then, when a developer uploads a package to the > autobuilder and he thinks it's ready for extras it marks the package > somehow as ready (instead of pushing it directly, like now). > > Then the QA team members can look somehow at the list of "ready" > packages and test any of them. After they test a package, they may > "vote" somehow their opinion (with a optional field where they can go > into details what they like/didn't). If package gets at least one > negative vote, it's out of the queue for extras. If package gets, say, > 10 positive votes (the number is to be determined experimentally), > it's > automatically moved to extras.
Promotion from extras-devel to extras should be based on technical merit only. Voting will only lead to the type of acrimony we have already seen on this list and is structurally unfair. The QA process should involve anyone willing to participate, hopefully with many community members testing packages, but also Nokia being involved as well. Jeremiah _______________________________________________ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
