Hi everyone, So, I went in and did a priority landing of the fix. Alan helped me out testing the whole test plan and we decided to land it. Reverting was a bad idea since the silo had a few different components in it, so it was more straightforward this way. Hopefully the next image will be fine.
It was also a mistake on my side, again assumptions assumptions - but no use finding excuses. I apologize for my part and I promise this will not happen again. Anyway, thanks Manuel and Alan! :) On 01.03.2014 19:49, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Mar 01, 2014, at 03:35 PM, Roberto Alsina wrote: > >> There was also a lack of thorough verification on my side as one of the >> landers: I asked "did you guys check this" because I could not. I did not >> ask "did you guys follow the whole test plan?" >> >> So, a learning opportunity all around :-( > > Several of us also had good discussions yesterday about getting the whole > stack QA and automatically tested. That's a huge step toward ensuring no > regressions. Let's make sure that click updates are also on that plan. > > -Barry > > > Best regards, -- Łukasz 'sil2100' Zemczak lukasz.zemc...@canonical.com www.canonical.com -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone Post to : ubuntu-phone@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
