Quantcast

[Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
23 messages Options
12
Bjoern Michaelsen Bjoern Michaelsen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

[Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

Hi all,

I would like to set up a LibreOffice QA call to streamline our QA efforts. I
propose to make our first call on:

 Friday, 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

I hope to repeat this call biweekly to discuss and coordinate ongoing QA
issues, it would be great to have QA-contributors for the topics below able to
join this call.

prototype agenda for the first call:
structured manual testing:
 - oneshot populating Ubuntu checkbox for LibreOffice 3.5? (Nicholas Skaggs)
 - syncing checkbox from litmus for LibreOffice 3.6 (Yifan Jiang)
upstream bugwrangling:
 - >1000 NEEDINFO bugs, what can we do about it? (Rainer Bielefeld, Cor Nouws)
 - general bug stats (Rainer Bielefeld)
 - submarine bugs (aka important bugs that stay undiscovered too long) (Cor Nouws)
distro bugwrangling:
 - upstreaming criteria/customs
   (Christopher M. Penalver, Petr Mladek, Caolan NcNamara, Rene Engelhard, Jan Holesovsky)
community testing, communication:
 - how do we recruit more QA-interested contributors? (Cor Nouws, Sophie Gaultier)
 - can we have QA-related EasyHacks? Can we explicitly promote those? (all)
regression testing/bibisect:
 - how do we broaden the bibisect know-how (Korrawit Pruegsanusak, Bjoern Michaelsen)
 - currently 27/27 bibisected bugs are older than the bibisect-range:
   - do we maybe need a bibisect for 3.4?
   - might indicate trouble during the bigmerge
 - bibisect bugzilla etiquette
unittests/automated testing: (Markus Mohrhard)
 - overview of what we have
 - can we get non-developers into this, is there a way for non-C++ coders to
   get involved?

Although I know not everyone proposed might be able to join the call, I would
be happy if you try. If there are additional issues needing to be discussed,
please reply to this mail with your addition. I will post the phone conference
numbers later.

Best,

Bjoern
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Nino Nino
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

Hi,

On Wednesday 07 March 2012, 02:45:13 Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:

> I would like to set up a LibreOffice QA call to streamline our QA efforts. I
> propose to make our first call on:

Great!

Some ideas/wishes/comments from an interested layman:

> structured manual testing:
>  - oneshot populating Ubuntu checkbox for LibreOffice 3.5? (Nicholas Skaggs)
> - syncing checkbox from litmus for LibreOffice 3.6 (Yifan Jiang)

I'd like to add a typical requirement/wish from an occasional tester:
- to have an easy way to set up an individual collection of test cases which
can be reused (first idea: e.g. by tagging them), so that everybody sees, who
is "subscribed" to a test case (and also on which platform). Thereby, manual
release testing can be kind of self-coordinated without big effort.

> upstream bugwrangling:
>  - >1000 NEEDINFO bugs, what can we do about it? (Rainer Bielefeld, Cor
> Nouws) - general bug stats (Rainer Bielefeld)

idea/proposal from the German discuss list: to organize "Bug Review Weeks" (in
contrast/addition to "Bug Hunting Sessions") as community events, preferably
in native languages and only later on international level, so the learning
curve / barrier can be kept smooth.

An additional (possibly somewhat crazy) idea: To gather test cases from the
community by asking "What functionality do *you* want to be tested? Provide a
well-thought-out testcase for your personal most needed function (or most
annoying regression ;-) ".

Nino
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Nino Nino
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

On Wednesday 07 March 2012, 08:42:10 Nino Novak wrote:

> Some ideas/wishes/comments from an interested layman:

just an additional thought:
is there a possibility to define certain "test paths"? Mean, some kind of
"sophisticated" test case which - if passed - "contains" a couple of "simple"
test cases? Thus, result entry could be simplified a lot.
E.g. if there is a testcase, "print monthly expenses report from CSV data
using data pilot", it would encompass opening a file, CSV import, data pilot
function, data grouping, table printing.

Nino
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Cor Nouws Cor Nouws
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

In reply to this post by Bjoern Michaelsen
Hi Bjoern, *,

Thanks for the invitation and the initiative!

Bjoern Michaelsen wrote (07-03-12 02:45)

> I would like to set up a LibreOffice QA call to streamline our QA efforts. I
> propose to make our first call on:
>
>   Friday, 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

As life shows now, I'll be able to join. And I'll try to keep it that way.

> I hope to repeat this call biweekly to discuss and coordinate ongoing QA
> issues, it would be great to have QA-contributors for the topics below able to
> join this call.
>
> prototype agenda for the first call:

I have some explicit ideas on some of the items.
Should we attempt to exchange those before the meeting, or at least
mention them (briefly)?

> [...]
> If there are additional issues needing to be discussed,
> please reply to this mail with your addition.

Yes, I have one.
Looking at the developer community, I see that there is a conscious,
consequent approach, executed with talent and lots of time(presence), of
encouraging and guiding developers, especially of course the new ones.
Thus making people feel comfortable, learning to find their way,
enabling to do them things that they like and are useful for the project
etc.
Though we have quite some people engaged in QA, with enthusiasm and
talent, I think we miss some drive like that.
Obviously QA work is not the same as development work, and maybe people
also (partly) step in from a different perspective. Thus a one-to-one
copy of the approach, that is so successful at the developer side, will
not do. But of course, key elements are encouragement, guiding, joy in
the work, sharing success, acknowledgement etc
(hope I choose all the right words ;-) )
I'm not sure if this is an easy to solve issue. But 'submitting' it
first, and giving it a clear 'summary' of course are the first steps to
resolve this.

Regards,

--
  - Cor
  - http://nl.libreoffice.org

_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
sophi sophi
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

In reply to this post by Bjoern Michaelsen
Hi Bjoern, all,
On 07/03/2012 02:45, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I would like to set up a LibreOffice QA call to streamline our QA efforts. I
> propose to make our first call on:
>
>   Friday, 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC
>
> I hope to repeat this call biweekly to discuss and coordinate ongoing QA
> issues, it would be great to have QA-contributors for the topics below able to
> join this call.
>
> prototype agenda for the first call:
> structured manual testing:
>   - oneshot populating Ubuntu checkbox for LibreOffice 3.5? (Nicholas Skaggs)
>   - syncing checkbox from litmus for LibreOffice 3.6 (Yifan Jiang)

For Checkbox we are waiting for an experienced/skilled QA member to
write the tests, will we have this person for the call?
Concerning Litmus, not sure it's necessary to sync it finally because I
don't see it's usage enhanced. It's not really adapted to our needs and
we should first think at the people who will use it instead of losing
time writing tests that nobody will run.
May be it would be interesting that our QA member working on Checkbox
with Canonical work also on Case conductor to see how it feet our needs
and/or how we can adapt it with the help of the language communities.

> upstream bugwrangling:
>   ->1000 NEEDINFO bugs, what can we do about it? (Rainer Bielefeld, Cor Nouws)
>   - general bug stats (Rainer Bielefeld)
>   - submarine bugs (aka important bugs that stay undiscovered too long) (Cor Nouws)
> distro bugwrangling:
>   - upstreaming criteria/customs
>     (Christopher M. Penalver, Petr Mladek, Caolan NcNamara, Rene Engelhard, Jan Holesovsky)
> community testing, communication:
>   - how do we recruit more QA-interested contributors? (Cor Nouws, Sophie Gaultier)
>   - can we have QA-related EasyHacks? Can we explicitly promote those? (all)
> regression testing/bibisect:
>   - how do we broaden the bibisect know-how (Korrawit Pruegsanusak, Bjoern Michaelsen)
>   - currently 27/27 bibisected bugs are older than the bibisect-range:
>     - do we maybe need a bibisect for 3.4?
>     - might indicate trouble during the bigmerge
>   - bibisect bugzilla etiquette
> unittests/automated testing: (Markus Mohrhard)
>   - overview of what we have
>   - can we get non-developers into this, is there a way for non-C++ coders to
>     get involved?
>
> Although I know not everyone proposed might be able to join the call, I would
> be happy if you try. If there are additional issues needing to be discussed,
> please reply to this mail with your addition. I will post the phone conference
> numbers later.

Cor will be available for the community things, so not sure I'll have to
be there.

Kind regards
Sophie

--
Founding member of The Document Foundation
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Bjoern Michaelsen Bjoern Michaelsen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

Hi,

On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 11:08:03AM +0100, Sophie Gautier wrote:
> For Checkbox we are waiting for an experienced/skilled QA member to
> write the tests, will we have this person for the call?

I hope both Nicholas Skaggs and Yifan Jiang will be able to join the call so
that we can work out what is doable, I assume that to be a lot easier to figure
out in a call than via mail.

> Concerning Litmus, not sure it's necessary to sync it finally
> because I don't see it's usage enhanced. It's not really adapted to
> our needs and we should first think at the people who will use it
> instead of losing time writing tests that nobody will run.
> May be it would be interesting that our QA member working on
> Checkbox with Canonical work also on Case conductor to see how it
> feet our needs and/or how we can adapt it with the help of the
> language communities.

Ok, let me rephrase the agena point to 'make it easy for Canonical (or other
downstreams) to easily include our upstream tests in downstream infrastructure
so that we can use that userbase for our tests too'. The technologies (litmus,
case conductor, checkbox) are not set in stone and we should use whatever fits
our needs best. Better?

> Cor will be available for the community things, so not sure I'll
> have to be there.

Well, esp. for community and communications we should have as many as possible
there to keep ways short.

Best,

Bjoern
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Bjoern Michaelsen Bjoern Michaelsen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

In reply to this post by Nino
Hi Nino,

On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 08:42:10AM +0100, Nino Novak wrote:
> I'd like to add a typical requirement/wish from an occasional tester:
> - to have an easy way to set up an individual collection of test cases which
> can be reused (first idea: e.g. by tagging them), so that everybody sees, who
> is "subscribed" to a test case (and also on which platform). Thereby, manual
> release testing can be kind of self-coordinated without big effort.

Noted. We will discuss that on the call. Keep in mind, that I myself know very
little about the systems (litmus, case conductor, checkbox) involved and their
abilities. I hope to learn more about them on the call.

> > upstream bugwrangling:
> >  - >1000 NEEDINFO bugs, what can we do about it? (Rainer Bielefeld, Cor
> > Nouws) - general bug stats (Rainer Bielefeld)
>
> idea/proposal from the German discuss list: to organize "Bug Review Weeks" (in
> contrast/addition to "Bug Hunting Sessions") as community events, preferably
> in native languages and only later on international level, so the learning
> curve / barrier can be kept smooth.

Go ahead and organize! Dont ask for permission to get started, just do and see
what works. Although there are quite a lot germans on the project our workload
and email load does not allow us to also keep a close eye on localized mailing
lists. So: So dont ask to ask -- just do it(*)! ;)


> An additional (possibly somewhat crazy) idea: To gather test cases from the
> community by asking "What functionality do *you* want to be tested? Provide a
> well-thought-out testcase for your personal most needed function (or most
> annoying regression ;-) ".

Such things should never be one-way, but an exchange: You write one test you
care about and let others test it for you, in exchange for you testing the
stuff that _others_ care about. Somebody championing that (like Cor did for the
BHS) would be great. It is likely to late for the 3.5 series, but if this is
getting started now, it might easily be well prepared for 3.6. Are you
interested in contributing to this?

Best,

Bjoern

(*) The same applies to other local communities, of course. Spread the word!
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Bjoern Michaelsen Bjoern Michaelsen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

In reply to this post by Cor Nouws
On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 09:55:10AM +0100, Cor Nouws wrote:
> I have some explicit ideas on some of the items.
> Should we attempt to exchange those before the meeting, or at least
> mention them (briefly)?

In general, just mention a new topic as a oneliner to add to the agenda. If its
something specific and detailed I would propose to add the text to the wiki add
add the link to the agenda. Feel free to do so so for this call, although I
fear with this being a first call we already have more than enough as-is, so
dont be angry, if things get postponed to a later call.

> Obviously QA work is not the same as development work, and maybe
> people also (partly) step in from a different perspective. Thus a
> one-to-one copy of the approach, that is so successful at the
> developer side, will not do.

gentoo and debian are just two successful example projects that are
volunteer-only and do not do too much core development themselves -- indeed
they do mostly release engineering and QA. And of course, we will simply copy
LibreOffice development. As the examples show, QA can be volunteer-based and
self-sustained -- independant of development.

Best,

Bjoern
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Nino Novak-3 Nino Novak-3
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

In reply to this post by Bjoern Michaelsen
Hi Bjoern, all,

On Wednesday 07 March 2012, 12:48:25 Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 08:42:10AM +0100, Nino Novak wrote:

> > [test case tagging]
>
> Noted.

Thanks :-)

> We will discuss that on the call.

If time allows, fine.

But on the call you should (IMHO) focus on strategic questions as identifying
the actual QA bottlenecks  :-)

And of course, bringing all those thoughts from you, Cor and Yifan into an
adequate coherence :-)

> > [Bug Review Weeks]
>
> Go ahead and organize! Dont ask for permission to get started, just do and
> see what works.

Wasn't meant as question just as idea sharing :-)


> > [community test case gathering]
>
>...  Are you interested in contributing to this?

(I am a bit hesitant - as my skills are not very prominent in this area.
But my personal preference ATM is the Review Week. )


> Such things should never be one-way, but an exchange: You write one test you
> care about and let others test it for you, in exchange for you testing the
> stuff that _others_ care about.

If we could manage to put together a system that supports such mutual hand
washing, it would be fine. But without, I'm a bit lost, how to organize this.
OTOH, pure Test Case gathering could simply be started in the wiki. So I'd
tend to start with gathering first and add mutuality later?

Nino

_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Cor Nouws Cor Nouws
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

In reply to this post by Bjoern Michaelsen
Hi,

Bjoern Michaelsen wrote (07-03-12 13:04)

> On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 09:55:10AM +0100, Cor Nouws wrote:
>> I have some explicit ideas on some of the items.
>> Should we attempt to exchange those before the meeting, or at least
>> mention them (briefly)?
>
> In general, just mention a new topic as a oneliner to add to the agenda. If its
> something specific and detailed I would propose to add the text to the wiki add
> add the link to the agenda. Feel free to do so so for this call, although I
> fear with this being a first call we already have more than enough as-is, so
> dont be angry, if things get postponed to a later call.

I understand the scope and possibilities of the meeting.
Will try to add some notes before - if I think it makes sense for the
moment.

>> Obviously QA work is not the same as development work, and maybe
>> people also (partly) step in from a different perspective. Thus a
>> one-to-one copy of the approach, that is so successful at the
>> developer side, will not do.
>
> gentoo and debian are just two successful example projects that are
> volunteer-only and do not do too much core development themselves -- indeed
> they do mostly release engineering and QA. And of course, we will simply copy
> LibreOffice development. As the examples show, QA can be volunteer-based and
> self-sustained -- independant of development.

IMO the question is not so much whether it should be volunteer-based or
not, but rather how to reach a situation where the QA work is reasonable
in balance with development - and preferable in the not to far future..
So, good to read that the Gentoo & Debian people did it. Is known how
they managed, or was it just there right from the beginning :-) ?

Regards,

--
  - Cor
  - http://nl.libreoffice.org

_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Yi Fan Jiang Yi Fan Jiang
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

In reply to this post by Bjoern Michaelsen
Hi Bjoern,

Thanks for inviting and coordinating everything ( sorry for the late reply, it
was a busy week ) :) I'll try to join when it is possible, though the time
could be a bit late in China. An obstacle is I am not sure if it is possible
to make a call successfully from home ( I don't have a tie line at home ),
will that be an SIP call or something else?

> prototype agenda for the first call:
> structured manual testing:
>  - oneshot populating Ubuntu checkbox for LibreOffice 3.5? (Nicholas Skaggs)
>  - syncing checkbox from litmus for LibreOffice 3.6 (Yifan Jiang)

Yes, I think it would be great if we can sync the stuff automatically. I
prefer to maintain test cases in Litmus since it has a libreoffice project
specific structure and maintainable already. Also from the testing statistics
people is starting to get familiar with it:

https://tcm.documentfoundation.org/

As for the test cases content, we actually improve the testing from time to
time, but unfortunately I myself do not usually have sufficient time to do
everything I wanted. It would be great if we have extra QAs to write the test
cases, which is also one of the most important aspect we encourage people to
do in Litmus:

http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Test_Case
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Litmus/Litmus_User_Guide#Populate_New_Test_Cases

Meanwhile the good thing is we have a growing number of people who is running
testing, and it would be fabulous if more people from Ubuntu community could
help this out :)

Best wihses,
Yifan

On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 02:45:13AM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
> Hi all,
>

>
> I hope to repeat this call biweekly to discuss and coordinate ongoing QA
> issues, it would be great to have QA-contributors for the topics below able to
> join this call.
>

> upstream bugwrangling:
>  - >1000 NEEDINFO bugs, what can we do about it? (Rainer Bielefeld, Cor Nouws)
>  - general bug stats (Rainer Bielefeld)
>  - submarine bugs (aka important bugs that stay undiscovered too long) (Cor Nouws)
> distro bugwrangling:
>  - upstreaming criteria/customs
>    (Christopher M. Penalver, Petr Mladek, Caolan NcNamara, Rene Engelhard, Jan Holesovsky)
> community testing, communication:
>  - how do we recruit more QA-interested contributors? (Cor Nouws, Sophie Gaultier)
>  - can we have QA-related EasyHacks? Can we explicitly promote those? (all)
> regression testing/bibisect:
>  - how do we broaden the bibisect know-how (Korrawit Pruegsanusak, Bjoern Michaelsen)
>  - currently 27/27 bibisected bugs are older than the bibisect-range:
>    - do we maybe need a bibisect for 3.4?
>    - might indicate trouble during the bigmerge
>  - bibisect bugzilla etiquette
> unittests/automated testing: (Markus Mohrhard)
>  - overview of what we have
>  - can we get non-developers into this, is there a way for non-C++ coders to
>    get involved?
>
> Although I know not everyone proposed might be able to join the call, I would
> be happy if you try. If there are additional issues needing to be discussed,
> please reply to this mail with your addition. I will post the phone conference
> numbers later.
>
> Best,
>
> Bjoern
> _______________________________________________
> List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
> Mail address: [hidden email]
> Change settings: http://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/
>
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Bjoern Michaelsen Bjoern Michaelsen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC -- dial in details

In reply to this post by Bjoern Michaelsen
Hi,

On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 02:45:13AM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I would like to set up a LibreOffice QA call to streamline our QA efforts. I
> propose to make our first call on:
>
>  Friday, 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC
>
> [...]
>
> I will post the phone conference numbers later.

Dial-in numbers for countries outside Germany can be found at:
http://www.talkyoo.net/main/telefonkonferenz_internationale_rufnummern

Dial-in numbers inside Germany are:

    +49 40 18881000 (Hamburg, landline)
    +49 40 95069970 (Hamburg, landline)
    +49 89 666660893 (Munich, landline)
    +49 1570 3336000 (vistream mobile network)

Room:

    Room number: 53 71 38
    No participant PIN is required
    All calls will be recorded
    All participants can speak

Note that you can also use Skype to join the call.

Best,

Bjoern (who is fighting of a cold)
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Bjoern Michaelsen Bjoern Michaelsen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

In reply to this post by Yi Fan Jiang
Hi Yifan Jiang,

On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 10:39:57AM +0800, Yifan Jiang wrote:
> Hi Bjoern,
>
> Thanks for inviting and coordinating everything ( sorry for the late reply, it
> was a busy week ) :) I'll try to join when it is possible, though the time
> could be a bit late in China. An obstacle is I am not sure if it is possible
> to make a call successfully from home ( I don't have a tie line at home ),
> will that be an SIP call or something else?

It should be possible to join the call via Skype. Will that work for you?

Best,

Bjoern
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Petr Mladek Petr Mladek
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

In reply to this post by Bjoern Michaelsen
Bjoern Michaelsen píše v St 07. 03. 2012 v 12:48 +0100:
> On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 08:42:10AM +0100, Nino Novak wrote:
> > An additional (possibly somewhat crazy) idea: To gather test cases from the
> > community by asking "What functionality do *you* want to be tested? Provide a
> > well-thought-out testcase for your personal most needed function (or most
> > annoying regression ;-) ".

I really like the idea. Sounds like a great approach to motivate people
for writing test cases.


> Such things should never be one-way, but an exchange: You write one test you
> care about and let others test it for you, in exchange for you testing the
> stuff that _others_ care about.

I would not be afraid of this. We need more test cases right know, so we
should be opened for any of test cases. We just need someone (more
people) that would watch the situation, move the test cases into the
right categories by priority, fix/reject confusing or strange test cases
and teach others.

I suggest to do something like with the developer mailing list. New
contributors might send test cases to this mailing list. Yi Fan or other
experienced QA people will review them and put into Litmus. If a
contributor is good, she might get write access and help with reviewing
test cases from others.

This is already described at
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Test_Cases_Contribution
which is linked from
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Test_Case
which is linked from
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA


Best Regards,
Petr

_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Petr Mladek Petr Mladek
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

In reply to this post by Nino Novak-3
Nino Novak píše v St 07. 03. 2012 v 21:47 +0100:
> If we could manage to put together a system that supports such mutual hand
> washing, it would be fine. But without, I'm a bit lost, how to organize this.
> OTOH, pure Test Case gathering could simply be started in the wiki. So I'd
> tend to start with gathering first and add mutuality later?

We need someone who move the test cases from wiki into Litmus or any
other tool. Also I suggest to send new test cases to this mailing list
because it is more interactive and it works well on the developers
mailing list.

Note that wiki is fine for writing but it is not practical for running
test cases.

Please do not ignore Litmus until we have a better tool. Rimas, Yi Fan,
and others already put a lot of effort into improving Litmus. It is
usable. We are even able to somehow translate description of the test
cases. IMHO, the main problem is that we are currently not able to
translate UI and test cases titles. I am not sure how complicated it
would be to fix this and how it works in other tools.

Note that migration to other tool should be easy. We just need to move
the test cases description. The bigger problem is to write and sort the
test cases. We should not be afraid of Litmus. We should just use its
features until we have anything better. It is here and running.


Best Regards,
Petr

_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Bjoern Michaelsen Bjoern Michaelsen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

[Libreoffice-qa] minutes of LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

In reply to this post by Bjoern Michaelsen
Hi all,

here are the minutes of the QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

attendants: Cor, Ivan, Rainer, Markus, Michael, Korrawit, Petr, Kendy, Bjoern

  - structured manual testing:
    - getting testcases for 3.5 from Litmus to Checkbox
      - we currently have some ~50 testcases in Litmus -- it should be easy
        to just copypaste them as the time window is limited until
        Ubuntu 12.04 beta2 (Bjoern)
AA    - copypaste existing manual test as a one off for 3.5/Precise (Bjoern)
AA    - Check if test documents are URLs properly distributed to Checkbox (Bjoern)
    - find a good way to script sync testcases from Litmus to Checkbox and
      maybe even results back to Litmus
      TBD later: (maybe discuss when Nicholas Skaggs and Yifan Jiang are around)
  - bugwrangling
    - still too much old regressions (Rainer)
      - 60 (11 most annoying) from earlier releases
    - proposed mitgation:
      more viciously and realistically downgrade priority, we need to support
      Rainers decisions there
  - community building/communication:
AA  - Find and empower new active QA contributors (Cor)
AA  - Provide Cor with suitable queries (Rainer)
      - Note: We can currently only query for Reporters not commenters (Rainer)
    - Can we recognize bug triagers in the release notes along with the
      developer providing the fix for minor releases? (Bjoern)
      - Would need a up-to-date wikipage of active triagers (Petr)
AA    - Update/Create active triagers wiki page (Cor/Rainer)
    - Nice stats and graphs by Rainer need more visibility
AA    - Publish on blog/planets (Cor)
AA    - Create some QA EasyHacks (Bjoern)
    - We could spend some TDF money on a paid QA guy (Michael)
      - for example to get something like this implemented:
        https://bugzilla.gnome.org/page.cgi?id=weekly-bug-summary.html
AA    - collect further ideas for spending such a resource (Cor/Rainer)
      - some of the QA EasyHacks might also be suitable (Bjoern)
      - perl is easy to integrate with Perl (Markus)
    - Can we learn from other opensource projects?
AA    - Set Cor up with the Community/Forum maintainers at the distros
        to better propagate Hackfests, Bug Hunting Sessions etc.
        (Bjoern, Petr, Caolan, others?)
    - Can we make bibisecting easier accessible?
AA    - Walkthrough setup at Hackfest to find out what need better docs
        (Bjoern/Rainer)
      - Setting up a ready-to-go VirtualBox with everything installed would be
        cool (Bjoern)
AA      - unsure from my notes: maybe Korrawit is interested in doing this?
   - automated testing (Markus)
     - http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Calc_Import_Unit_Tests
AA   - Really straightforward for Calc, just needs more CSV test documents (all)
     - in development for other apps

Next call will be in two weeks on:

 Friday, 2012-03-23 15:00 UTC

Accompanying IRC channel for the calls is #libreoffice on freenode.

I tried my best to keep up with my notes, still all additions and corrections
are most welcome.


Best,

Bjoern
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Yi Fan Jiang Yi Fan Jiang
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: minutes of LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

Hi Bjoern,

On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 06:42:45PM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> here are the minutes of the QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC
>
> attendants: Cor, Ivan, Rainer, Markus, Michael, Korrawit, Petr, Kendy,
> Bjoern

+ Yifan :)

Thanks for the minutes and pushing on everything. Actually I was there and
maybe not pretty audible because of the bad net circumstances and skype. I
hope it would be better next time.

>   - structured manual testing:
>     - getting testcases for 3.5 from Litmus to Checkbox
>       - we currently have some ~50 testcases in Litmus -- it should be easy
>         to just copypaste them as the time window is limited until
>         Ubuntu 12.04 beta2 (Bjoern)

FYI, here are the latest test cases we got:

https://tcm.documentfoundation.org/show_test.cgi?searchType=by_category&product_id=1&branch_id=20

The testcases marked as [OBSOLETE] are merged into ordinary cases, so they
will be useless to populate into checkbox. Thank you to handle them :)

> AA    - copypaste existing manual test as a one off for 3.5/Precise (Bjoern)
> AA    - Check if test documents are URLs properly distributed to Checkbox (Bjoern)
>     - find a good way to script sync testcases from Litmus to Checkbox and
>       maybe even results back to Litmus
>       TBD later: (maybe discuss when Nicholas Skaggs and Yifan Jiang are around)

Sure, Rimas was doing smart things in Litmus system and contributed a lot, it
would be great if he could join the meeting next time as well.

Best wishes,
Yifan
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Bjoern Michaelsen Bjoern Michaelsen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: minutes of LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

In reply to this post by Bjoern Michaelsen
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 06:42:45PM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
> AA    - Set Cor up with the Community/Forum maintainers at the distros
>         to better propagate Hackfests, Bug Hunting Sessions etc.
>         (Bjoern, Petr, Caolan, others?)

Done (my part of it).

Best,

Bjoern
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Bjoern Michaelsen Bjoern Michaelsen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: minutes of LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

In reply to this post by Bjoern Michaelsen
Hi,

On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 06:42:45PM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
> AA    - copypaste existing manual test as a one off for 3.5/Precise (Bjoern)
> AA    - Check if test documents are URLs properly distributed to Checkbox (Bjoern)

Just discussed this with Nicholas Skaggs, the deadline for this is Tuesday(*),
so any help with this is welcome. Essentially all that needs to be done is
copying of the testcase with a little decoration:

 http://paste.ubuntu.com/886661/

If you want to help out, Nicholas is around as balloons on IRC (freenode). I
will jump in on Monday, if needed.

Best,

Bjoern

(*) it sneaked itself there, it was originally assumed to be Friday
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
Nicholas Skaggs Nicholas Skaggs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: minutes of LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

Thanks to a brave ubuntu community member, kaldor, these got entered.. I
just pushed the revision, so they should be included for beta2 testing.
We ported 34 tests -- we left out the "general" tests, as they mostly
didn't apply for our purposes. Thanks!


Nicholas

On 03/16/2012 02:41 PM, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 06:42:45PM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
>> AA    - copypaste existing manual test as a one off for 3.5/Precise (Bjoern)
>> AA    - Check if test documents are URLs properly distributed to Checkbox (Bjoern)
> Just discussed this with Nicholas Skaggs, the deadline for this is Tuesday(*),
> so any help with this is welcome. Essentially all that needs to be done is
> copying of the testcase with a little decoration:
>
>  http://paste.ubuntu.com/886661/
>
> If you want to help out, Nicholas is around as balloons on IRC (freenode). I
> will jump in on Monday, if needed.
>
> Best,
>
> Bjoern
>
> (*) it sneaked itself there, it was originally assumed to be Friday

_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
Change settings: http://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/
12
Loading...