Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Proposal for BH sessions organization
Hi Sophie, all, looks like a good starting point. It would be nice not to forget that when some thing is done, it is reported in the QA ML. Regards. Miguel Ángel. El 16/02/16 a las 17:17, Sophie escribió: Hi all, So to sum up the topic and make a proposal: - BH on one day the Friday only (Cloph) - come with 10 features to test thoroughly during the BH, the list is taken from the release notes and selected by QA members, submitted to ESC, they could give a quick feedback/input, (derived from Cor and Miguel Angel ideas) - publish the list of feature to be tested on the BH session wiki page - dedicate a MozTrap run to this 10 features (to make the test run shorter, newer and then more attractive) - revive the bot Cloph has developed (never remind his name :) - advertise that BH takes place either on the mailing list and irc (maybe people are afraid by irc) or should we discuss having more "modern" communication channels like hangout too? Feedback welcome :) Cheers Sophie ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Proposal for BH sessions organization
Hi, Thank you Sophie for your proposal. For non-pro contributors (like me), it would be difficult to be there on Friday (exclusively). Please, keep it on friday AND week-ends ! Arnaud LE CAM > > De : "libreoffice-qa-requ...@lists.freedesktop.org" > >À : libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org >Envoyé le : Mercredi 17 février 2016 13h00 >Objet : Libreoffice-qa Digest, Vol 56, Issue 10 > > >- Mail transféré - > >Send Libreoffice-qa mailing list submissions to >libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >libreoffice-qa-requ...@lists.freedesktop.org > >You can reach the person managing the list at >libreoffice-qa-ow...@lists.freedesktop.org > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of Libreoffice-qa digest..." > >Today's Topics: > > 1. Proposal for BH sessions organization (Sophie) >Hi all, > >So to sum up the topic and make a proposal: >- BH on one day the Friday only (Cloph) >- come with 10 features to test thoroughly during the BH, the list is >taken from the release notes and selected by QA members, submitted to >ESC, they could give a quick feedback/input, (derived from Cor and >Miguel Angel ideas) >- publish the list of feature to be tested on the BH session wiki page >- dedicate a MozTrap run to this 10 features (to make the test run >shorter, newer and then more attractive) >- revive the bot Cloph has developed (never remind his name :) >- advertise that BH takes place either on the mailing list and irc >(maybe people are afraid by irc) or should we discuss having more >"modern" communication channels like hangout too? > >Feedback welcome :) > >Cheers >Sophie > > > >-- >Sophie Gautier sophie.gaut...@documentfoundation.org >GSM: +33683901545 >IRC: sophi >Co-founder - Release coordinator >The Document Foundation > > > >___ >Libreoffice-qa mailing list >Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org >https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa > > > ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Proposal for BH sessions organization
Hi Sophie, Thanks for knotting the ideas together :) Sophie wrote on 16-02-16 17:17: > - come with 10 features to test thoroughly during the BH, the list is > taken from the release notes and selected by QA members, submitted to > ESC, they could give a quick feedback/input, (derived from Cor and > Miguel Angel ideas) My idea was about organizing energy around an area in the product/code to do things around a tender to get lots of bugs clarified and resolved. Not about features from the release notes. I expect a new approach with specific, changing goals (maybe each session), to attract more people, to be more appealing, awakening a feeling of urgency. Cheers, Cor -- Cor Nouws GPD key ID: 0xB13480A6 - 591A 30A7 36A0 CE3C 3D28 A038 E49D 7365 B134 80A6 - vrijwilliger http://nl.libreoffice.org - volunteer http://www.libreoffice.org - The Document Foundation Membership Committee Member ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Proposal for BH sessions organization
Hi Cor, Le 23/02/2016 00:07, Cor Nouws a écrit : > Hi Sophie, > > Thanks for knotting the ideas together :) > > Sophie wrote on 16-02-16 17:17: > >> - come with 10 features to test thoroughly during the BH, the list is >> taken from the release notes and selected by QA members, submitted to >> ESC, they could give a quick feedback/input, (derived from Cor and >> Miguel Angel ideas) > > My idea was about organizing energy around an area in the product/code > to do things around a tender to get lots of bugs clarified and resolved. > Not about features from the release notes. But bug hunting sessions are dedicated to new features and testing them thoroughly before the releases, so what you propose is something different, but could be implemented under another name like "code squeezing sessions" that are organized in between to major version (like we are now, next bug hunting session should be somewhere around week 18 so this is about still 10 weeks without BHS) > > I expect a new approach with specific, changing goals (maybe each > session), to attract more people, to be more appealing, awakening a > feeling of urgency. I understand and I'm all for it, but for me it's something different than the sessions we organized that solely focus on the next major version. Cheers Sophie -- Sophie Gautier sophie.gaut...@documentfoundation.org GSM: +33683901545 IRC: sophi Co-founder - Release coordinator The Document Foundation ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Proposal for BH sessions organization
Hey Sophie, Sophie wrote on 29-02-16 18:27: > But bug hunting sessions are dedicated to new features and testing them > thoroughly before the releases, so what you propose is something Sure. It's no one else but us, though, that determine the purpose of BHS. So if we learn that a certain approach is not appealing any more (or not at the moment), why not change? As BHS' currently do not work for new release testing, it would be a pity not to use them for another hard needed subject. > so what you propose is something > different, but could be implemented under another name like "code > squeezing sessions" Another event could possibly put extra pressure on people's agenda. Not sure if that will be met with applause :) But.. it's my feeling and my opinion. If there is strong evidence of support for something else: fine for me :) Cheers, Cor -- Cor Nouws GPD key ID: 0xB13480A6 - 591A 30A7 36A0 CE3C 3D28 A038 E49D 7365 B134 80A6 - vrijwilliger http://nl.libreoffice.org - volunteer http://www.libreoffice.org - The Document Foundation Membership Committee Member ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Proposal for BH sessions organization
Hey Cor, Le 29/02/2016 18:37, Cor Nouws a écrit : > Hey Sophie, > > Sophie wrote on 29-02-16 18:27: >> But bug hunting sessions are dedicated to new features and testing them >> thoroughly before the releases, so what you propose is something > > Sure. It's no one else but us, though, that determine the purpose of BHS. > So if we learn that a certain approach is not appealing any more (or not > at the moment), why not change? As BHS' currently do not work for new > release testing, it would be a pity not to use them for another hard > needed subject. Because we need those versions with new features to be more tested. That doesn't prevent to do other testing, and that's why we need to reorganize the BHS in a more attracting way and make them successful. > >> so what you propose is something >> different, but could be implemented under another name like "code >> squeezing sessions" > > Another event could possibly put extra pressure on people's agenda. Not > sure if that will be met with applause :) That could be also addressed by different populations, those who wants their version with less bugs and don't care about new features could be the best participants while others would be new feature lovers. > > But.. it's my feeling and my opinion. If there is strong evidence of > support for something else: fine for me :) No problem, you know that we sometime have different opinions but it's important to discuss them :) Thanks a lot for your feedback. Cheers Sophie -- Sophie Gautier sophie.gaut...@documentfoundation.org GSM: +33683901545 IRC: sophi Co-founder - Release coordinator The Document Foundation ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Proposal for BH sessions organization
On 16.2.2016 17:17, Sophie wrote: Hi all, So to sum up the topic and make a proposal: - BH on one day the Friday only (Cloph) - come with 10 features to test thoroughly during the BH, the list is taken from the release notes and selected by QA members, submitted to ESC, they could give a quick feedback/input, (derived from Cor and Miguel Angel ideas) - publish the list of feature to be tested on the BH session wiki page - dedicate a MozTrap run to this 10 features (to make the test run shorter, newer and then more attractive) - revive the bot Cloph has developed (never remind his name :) - advertise that BH takes place either on the mailing list and irc (maybe people are afraid by irc) or should we discuss having more "modern" communication channels like hangout too? Feedback welcome :) Cheers Sophie Hi All, what about to take all bugs on release notes page, create bugzilla query of bugs which are in status "resolved fixed". During BH session people will test it and they set status to "verified fixed". In this workflow you can measure progress and partly avoid duplicate work - when you refresh query, verified bugs disappear. Example> all bugs from https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/5.2 44 bugs on this page: 89646,90187,89646,90505,97906,92218,32364,90855,89646,91013,97906,96969,88027,34449,42629,82641,91013,90505,71459,94635,72196,87813,87812,89540,96871,76142,59699,79679,85761,94097,97919,84953,74834,93837,96683,97425,98417,98539,97386,96647,97439,98407,93837,93837 29 not verified - the goal is to make the sum to zero https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/buglist.cgi?bug_id=89646%2C90187%2C89646%2C90505%2C97906%2C92218%2C32364%2C90855%2C89646%2C91013%2C97906%2C96969%2C88027%2C34449%2C42629%2C82641%2C91013%2C90505%2C71459%2C94635%2C72196%2C87813%2C87812%2C89540%2C96871%2C76142%2C59699%2C79679%2C85761%2C94097%2C97919%2C84953%2C74834%2C93837%2C96683%2C97425%2C98417%2C98539%2C97386%2C96647%2C97439%2C98407%2C93837%2C93837&bug_id_type=anyexact&bug_status=RESOLVED&list_id=605938&query_format=advanced&resolution=FIXED Best, Raal ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Proposal for BH sessions organization
Raal wrote > what about to take all bugs on release notes page, create bugzilla query > of bugs which are in status "resolved fixed". During BH session people > will test it and they set status to "verified fixed". In this workflow > you can measure progress and partly avoid duplicate work - when you > refresh query, verified bugs disappear. That sounds like a good plan. Having a reachable goal and being able to see progress is a good way to motivate people. I would participate in such a session. But maybe it would make sense not to start BH sessions with the first Alpha (because by definition Alpha releases are unstable as was proven with Alpha1 which didn't even run under Windows 8+ ) Doing Alpha, Beta BH sessions before the RC in my opinion is too frequent and doesn't seem to be working. I believe it would make sense to do a 5.2 BH session with RC1 with the objective goal of verifying all bugs reported as fixed on release notes plus bugs specific to version 5.2 (new and/or regressions) reported during alpha and beta stages. Of course the RC1 BH session only makes sense if there is some commitment from TDF/developers to actually work with QA to make a "clean" release. Just my 2 non-dev cents... -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Proposal-for-BH-sessions-organization-tp4175684p4182002.html Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
