[Testing] test pages in the wiki -- Test Mtg, Wed 5/30 11am

[Kim Quirk]

Hi Tim (and all concerned testing people),
These are all good points that we should discuss as a group and come up with
a process we can all follow that will give us some indication of the quality
of the products.

We were talking about setting up a weekly meeting on Mondays, probably 1pm.
Call in is fine, but it would be great to have a representative here when/if
possible.

Since this coming Monday is a holiday and the design review is in NYC on
Tues, how about we set up a meeting for Wed, May 30, 11am to kick this
discussion off.


We can review/update the release criteria and decide the best way to test,
document, use trac, other tools, when/how often to have meetings, etc.

Tell me if that works for everyone.
Thanks,
Kim

On 5/24/07, Tim Reilly <treilly at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Kim,
> Thanks for the reply, we've been playing with the XOs for a few days now
> and I have a few thoughts about it in terms of QA.
>
> The difficulty of reporting 406 bugs is that some of them may already be
> fixed in 432 or some other new build. The new builds are SO much
> different that not testing the new build is often sorta nuts.
>
> More test planning and test structuring will be welcome and useful,
> however we can find lots of bugs as is even without large plans. You
> don't need to be following a test plan to find many, many bugs or things
> that aren't working as intended. This is the gray area which I feel we
> are having a bit of difficulty.
>
> Trac, from my use of it, is dissimilar to bugzilla in that suggestions
> and discussion in the comments of a trac bug are discouraged (except for
> status updates). In desktop qa at Redhat we're used to posting a
> UI-related issue, say some button not being useful or some ui piece
> feeling out of place, and get feedback on it from other QA people,
> developers, etc. After that a conclusion is reach and the bug is either
> fixed, closed, or postponed to be fixed later.
>
> We're on such a tight timeframe that (I feel) we have to start to solve
> this part of the problem now, rather than after we map out test plans
> for everything.
>
> I'm not sure these are questions or concerns with direct answers, I'm
> just trying to open up communication a bit. The way we're used to
> working is a bit different then how things seem to run in OLPC land.
>
> Tim
>
> On Thu, 2007-05-24 at 16:39 -0400, Kim Quirk wrote:
> > Hi Tim and others,
> > For bugs, use Trac. I don't recommend putting in bugs for any release
> > after build 406 right now because they are too much in flux (too many
> > bugs). There is usually an announcement on devel at laptop.org when there
> > is a stable release, and you can see the last good release from the
> > front page of the wiki. As we get closer to a release we'll probably
> > want to take all the builds.
> >
> > What we probably need to focus on right now is test planning. If you
> > use build 406 to see how things work today, we can all write some test
> > cases that can be executed each time we get a 'stable' build -- and
> > maybe figure out the best way to automate some of it.
> >
> > If you want to work on basic Functional tests or Secondary Functional
> > tests for each Activity, please go right into the Activity from the
> > 'Activities' page on the wiki and add a 'Functional Test' section (I
> > started this for the first few activities).
> >
> > Please feel free to suggest better format, etc.
> > I would really like to use something for tracking test cases -- Trac?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Kim
> >
> >
> > On 5/24/07, Tim Reilly <treilly at redhat.com> wrote:
> >         On Thu, 2007-05-24 at 14:43 -0400, Christopher Blizzard wrote:
> >         > Kim has been working on some pages that define some ideas
> >         around
> >         > testing:
> >         >
> >         > http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Test_issues
> >
> >         Now we know what apps (or, err, acts) to focus on, this is
> >         great! Should
> >         we start filing things in trac? Talk about what we're running
> >         into on
> >         olpc? What is the most helpful to you Cambridgians?
> >
> >         tim
> >
> >         _______________________________________________
> >         Testing mailing list
> >         Testing at laptop.org
> >         http://mailman.laptop.org/listinfo/testing
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.laptop.org/pipermail/testing/attachments/20070525/b491e88d/attachment.htm