Simon, IMO, milestone test plan should base on milestone schedule and feature plan, what feature goes in and which defects are fixed in this milestone. Based on this scope we can define our testing plan. Otherwise we are running into target unclear testing, defects will be missed.
2012/9/26 Shenfeng Liu <liush...@gmail.com> > 2012/9/26 Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com> > > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 7:51 AM, Shenfeng Liu <liush...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > 2012/9/24 Keith N. McKenna <keith.mcke...@comcast.net> > > > > > > > Rob Weir wrote: > > > > > > > >> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Keith N. McKenna > > > >> <keith.mcke...@comcast.net> wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> Rob Weir wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Shenfeng Liu < > liush...@gmail.com> > > > >>>> wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Hi, all, > > > >>>>> After 3.4.1, we are focusing on preparation of the community > > > >>>>> graduation. > > > >>>>> But I still want to remind us to take some time to think about > our > > > >>>>> future > > > >>>>> releases. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> We have the discussion early about what 3.5 and 4.0 should > look > > > >>>>> like. > > > >>>>> If > > > >>>>> I remember correctly: > > > >>>>> (1) 3.5 should be more about fidelity, reliability, performance > and > > > >>>>> translation, new platform support... > > > >>>>> (2) While 4.0, in addition to the same focuses as 3.5, should > also > > > add > > > >>>>> significant UX enhancements (e.g. sidebar, modern UI) and new > > values > > > >>>>> (e.g. > > > >>>>> Accessibility, social integration capability, enhanced installer, > > new > > > >>>>> features...). If we make good progress on those items at the same > > > time, > > > >>>>> we > > > >>>>> may consider to skip 3.5. > > > >>>>> (3) There are also more requirements (e.g. fixpack mechanism, > > > >>>>> simplifying > > > >>>>> the build structure, OOMXL export, smartArt...) we need to put > > into > > > >>>>> our > > > >>>>> backlog and consider their priority. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Even we don't need to discuss the solid plan now, but there > are > > > >>>>> already a > > > >>>>> lot of development activities on the trunk. So I think we need to > > > keep > > > >>>>> certain track on it. Though it may be too early to set a target > > date > > > >>>>> for > > > >>>>> the next release, but it is important for us to tell more about > > what > > > we > > > >>>>> think the next release should contain. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> So I'm suggesting the following: > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> 1. Keep updating the current release planning wiki: > > > >>>>> - > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** > > > >>>>> AOO+3.5+Release+Planning< > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.5+Release+Planning > > > > > > > >>>>> - > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** > > > >>>>> AOO+4.0+Release+Planning< > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Planning > > > > > > > >>>>> I know it is a little confusing for 2 places to input. But > > think > > > >>>>> about > > > >>>>> the scope we agreed above. You can input to the wiki that you > think > > > >>>>> your > > > >>>>> work belong to. I personally will monitor both wiki pages. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> 2. Figure out a better way to manage our release backlog. e.g. > set > > > >>>>> Target > > > >>>>> Milestone to 3.5 or 4.0 in Bugzilla for what we recommended. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> 3. Deliver milestone builds to harvest our development fruits. A > > > >>>>> milestone > > > >>>>> build is: > > > >>>>> (a) a development snapshot that contains the > > > >>>>> features/enhancements > > > >>>>> that implemented till now; > > > >>>>> (b) passed regression test to ensure no severe defects; > > > >>>>> (c) announced on a development wiki; > > > >>>>> (d) with documents on the wiki for the list of features > and > > > bug > > > >>>>> fixes > > > >>>>> in this milestone build (like a release notes). > > > >>>>> Since whatever 3.5 or 4.0 sounds to me like some thing in > next > > > >>>>> year > > > >>>>> or > > > >>>>> at least close to the end of this year, milestone builds can be > > light > > > >>>>> weigh > > > >>>>> on process to show our development progress, and give people a > more > > > >>>>> clear > > > >>>>> view on how far are we to the next release. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Looking forward every one's comments! > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> Maybe also start a "release notes" page on the wiki. Whenever a > new > > > >>>> feature or important bug fix is added to the trunk also add > > something > > > >>>> to the release notes. If something can be show with a "before > and > > > >>>> after" screen shot, include that. This might be easier than > waiting > > > >>>> until the end to prepare the release notes. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> -Rob > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> - Simon > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Rob; > > > >>> > > > >>> A Release Notes page already exists or 3.5 and one or 4.0 can be > > easily > > > >>> added. The complication I see here is since we have not decided > > whether > > > >>> the > > > >>> next release will be 3.5 or 4.0 that would require adding it in two > > > >>> places. > > > >>> I see that as a lot of overhead at this point. > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >> IMHO, the name is not so important. Everything in the trunk goes > into > > > >> the next release. Nothing not in the trunk goes into the next > > > >> release. So if we want a wiki page that is called "Release notes > for > > > >> AOO Target January 2013" then it would be sufficient. Just describe > > > >> significant changes there made in the trunk. Maybe in the end we > call > > > >> it "Apache OpenOffice 2013", or "Apache OpenOffice Adventitious > > > >> Armadillo" or something like that. That decision can come later. > > > >> > > > >> -Rob > > > >> > > > >> > > > > In that case lets use the existing 3.5 Release Notes as Armin has > > already > > > > put a number of entries in there the "name can be change to protect > the > > > > innocent later". > > > > > > > > > > +1 to use the existing 3.5 Release Notes wiki. > > > > > > And I just made a query in BZ, for defects fixed after 3.4 (May 8), and > > > excluded (1) some Products as qa, www, (2) those Target Milestone set > to > > > 3.4.1, and (3) Issue Type not in (DEFECT, FEATURE, ENHANCEMENT). And I > > got > > > about 500 results. I picked some of them in the list and believe there > > are > > > still many items need to be taken out, e.g. those fixed 1 year ago, but > > > just validated recently. So I think I can quickly go through them, and > > for > > > those who are really fixed/implemented in trunk after 3.4 and not in > > 3.4.1, > > > I will set the Target Milestone to AOO 3.5.0. And this list can be a > base > > > for our release notes. How do you think? > > > > > > Another thing is that we need to define a test plan for the milestone > > > build, which can be a lightweight regression test suite. The plan can > be > > > published on a wiki, and executed against very milestone build. > > > I agree with Juergen that we should start as early as possible. While I > > > still hope to get the confirmation from our QE team, since IMO they are > > the > > > key to this plan. :) > > > > > > - Simon > > > > > > > Simon -- > > > > Great that you started this. Will all new features ( these seem to be all > > in Calc by the current 3.5 Release Planning doc), be given an issue > > assignment at some point to correspond to your BZ search filter? The one > > listed as i110133 doesn't seem to show up in either your "features" or > > "all" filters you posted> I think it needs a target change (which I > didn't > > make). > > > > All this will be very very helpful for planning our next release. So, > thank > > you. > > > > > Kay, > The list on the wiki is out of date. So I update it and marked it out. I > think i110133 is a defect that proposed to fix in 3.5, but further on there > is no update for this defect... > Per our lesson&learned from 3.4.1, a better way is to leverage Bugzilla > query. So I created one: TargetTo350AllFix. Also, I put the link on 3.5 > wiki. > > - Simon > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > Keith > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> I could create a separate page as a sandbox where what you suggest > > > could > > > >>> be > > > >>> input, then when the release comes it is just a matter of moving > the > > > data > > > >>> from the sandbox into the formal Release Notes page. > > > >>> > > > >>> Regards > > > >>> Keith > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > MzK > > > > "Just 'cause you got the monkey off your back > > doesn't mean the circus has left town." > > -- George Carlin > > > -- Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
