Attila,
I don't disagree with you that "average user" vote is not the same as someone trying to follow a QA script and validate the application but I think we have more than one goal/question: 1. Is the application useful? I think the "average user" is the better equipped to answer this question so getting as many votes/comments from the "average community" definitely helps. 2. Is the application safe for the system? Here the average user will not have much to help but I still think that having a bunch of "power users" report "it has bugs", "it crashes my system" will be a good starting point. 3. What application do I want to install? What new applications are out there that I don't know about? These are questions that other people's reviews would help. Why not have all in one place and make it really easier for the user to give feedback. I was about to ask what "kisstester" was. I didn't know there was another application on the works. But as much as I value the testers job and opinions I think one of the big issues seems to be that "the demand is higher than the resources". Also, I can't see why bringing more information to the system can hurt.. It is up to us to decide how that information affects the promotion system but I think as a user I would like to know as much as I can about other people experiences with the applications. Back to the promotion business, I have some questions I would like to raise: 1. Right now there is not distinction between a new version of the package and the first one. I understand a previous version being approved should not be "guarantee" for a new release but it got help some. The worst case scenario for me is: one application gets approved on testing but has some big problem. The developer fixes the problem in a matter of minutes but it will take another 10-20 days to have it out there. A simple idea on how to improve is to have someway to communicate to the "testers" of the previous version about that and they would prioritize reviewing the new version. 2. After you promote a package to extras-testing and before it is approved or rejected you can't promote a new version of the package. When the "testing" process can take a long time there is a good chance a new version will be available before the last one was "voted". I don't pretend to know an answer here but I see a problem: developers will just promote to testing right after uploading to devel to save a place on the queue (defeating the purpose of extras-devel), or they will not promote a new version of their application that supposedly is better than the previous on "testing" because this will reset the clock. I understand the focus should not be the developer but I think the users will suffer on both cases. 3. Anything we can do to check for user's privacy vulnerabilities on the QA. Again, I don't have an answer but I think it is potentially more important than things like having 20% of the files here or there. Of course, much more difficult to check for too. By no means I want to reduce the merit of the "testers" but even they will miss what a "larger user base" would see. I think the testers should be the "rejecters" and not the "approvers". They would be in charge of checking for the minimum set requirements and where the application is a danger to the user. The community would be the positive stimulus . enough good and none bad the application is ready! Felipe _____ From: attila.cs...@gmail.com [mailto:attila.cs...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Attila Csipa Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 10:28 AM To: Felipe Crochik Cc: Polyvertex; maemo-developers@maemo.org Subject: Re: Package promoting On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Felipe Crochik <fel...@crochik.com> wrote: We had this discussion not long ago (http://maemo.org/community/maemo-developers/maemo_qa_process/?org_openpsa_q bpager_net_nemein_discussion_posts_page=1) I think the "appdownloader" has most of features we need to help users find, install, test and review applications. If we also add to the appdownloader reminders like "you installed xxxx 10 days ago, how would you rate it?" we would have a much more effective process. Inevitably, the question will pop-up, why did I made KISStester and not extend appdownloader or FAP ? I think both projects are excellent and wish they grow and prosper. BUT. I am really curious if I would want *that* sort of generic feedback in the testing queue. While having a separate app for it reduces the potential number of users, IMO it increases the chances of higher quality/SNR feedback or votes, meaning that we will be getting votes/comments from people who DID install the feedback software, it's not something sprung onto them by a (undoubtedly good, but) generic application installer. My target are the people who are willing to participate, have at least a rough understanding what they are getting into. Ideally QA is not about maximizing number of voters, but SNR. If we gain just a few dozen regular feedback persons, KISStester already did it's job. Best regards, Attila
_______________________________________________ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
