We (Frances and I) are currently installing/testing 765 on the school server and mesh networks, though here at 1cc we have "a bad RF day", so mesh-related testing might not be possible (we will see later).
I don't yet have my opinion regarding 765. Joe ----------- At 03:55 PM 9/26/2008, Kimberley Quirk wrote: >The only issue I see is that 765 is probably not the final release and >we are going to need to 'cram' test the final release more than >spending a lot of time with 765. > >Copying Ed and Michael on this as well as they will help figure out >what release is our final one and they need to know that you (and >others) are geared up to test... we just need to know what to test! > >Thanks, Mel, >Kim > > >On Sep 26, 2008, at 3:28 PM, Mel Chua wrote: > >>(Joe, please feel free to trump me on this - I'll keep plugging on >>this unless somebody tells me otherwise.) >> >>Greg, by Monday at 11 I can get you and the testing list a breakdown >>of the bugs in report 28 sorted by the following: >> >>1) Verified as closed - celebrate! >>2) Verified as not-closed (reopened), add to release notes >>3) We have no idea (probably treat the same as #2) - I hope this >>list will be empty. >> >>Plan for producing that email: (please revise/suggest as needed, >>partial strawman) >> >>* I've been writing test cases and procedures in the last few days >>for everything in report 33; I'll expand that to include the tickets >>in 28, which is a superset of 33. >> >>* You'll see me back at 1cc this afternoon installing 765 on the 20 >>XOs we got from Richard. I'm going to use those as the in-1cc 8.2.0 >>blockers test pool since our other testbeds are being used for >>connectivity tests (I think- Joe?) that require all 30 XOs running >>full-tilt on that. >> >>* This weekend: running tests. And running tests. And running tests. >>And - this is why I've spent so long on how-to-test tutorials and >>test cases - getting the visiting volunteers (+whoever I can pull in >>over IRC) on Saturday (MassXO comes in Sat. morning) and Sunday >>(support-gang) to run tests. I've been trying to build our capacity >>to run a lot of tests in parallel, and the bottleneck (imo) was >>people with XOs who were able to, with the given instructions, run >>all these tests. I hope I've fixed the "with the given instructions" >>part. You'll see this when I revise the [[Testing]] page later >>tonight. >> >>* Monday morning: Sit down and write up those 3 lists for Greg. >> >>How does this sound? >> >>-Mel >> >>Greg Smith wrote: >>>Hi Mel, Joe and team, >>> >>>I am writing the 8.2 release notes and I see a number of bugs which >>>are marked Test In Release, Test in Build or QA Signoff. >>> >>>If they really are fixed then I don't need to document them. >>>However, if they fail final test then I should document them. >>> >>>I believe the relevant list is at: >>>http://dev.laptop.org/report/28 >>> >>>Can you give me an ETA when you think you can have all of those >>>verified or sent back for more work? >>> >>>For now I will assume that they are fixed and I will not document >>>them. If you find one that is not fixed, please cc me on the bug or >>>let me know and I will add it to the release notes later. >>> >>>Thanks, >>> >>>Greg S > _______________________________________________ Testing mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/testing
