[Libreoffice] [Libreoffice-qa] 3.5.0 QA ... from BHS 1 to BHS 2
oolst at nouenoff.nl
Mon Jan 9 14:07:55 PST 2012
Thanks for replying. And as we wrote, I reply to the lists too.
Pedro Lino wrote (09-01-12 01:34)
>> So time to prepare bug hunt session two.
>> Or is there something that should make us change our mind for that?
>> As far as I've been able to notice, preparations for beta3 go fine, so
>> that's OK!
> I believe the second hunting session is only after the first RC is released?
Yes, that is the intention.
>> As may be read from the other thread (thread 'Evaluating first 3.5.0
>> Bug-Hunt Session' on the QA list) I'm far from sure about the impact on
>> level of issues, but looking at the overall activity/awareness, I think it's
>> We could send a mail to the people that submitted their fist bug during the
>> session, asking their feedback for possible improvement. Would that be OK,
>> do you think?
> I think that sending an email might be a little overkill... Announcing
> at the main LO page should be enough.
Hmm, the mail is not intended to announce, but to ask feedback. (Of
course one may think that if there is a strong feelng for doing so,
people would have done. But anyway..)
> Having BHSs too often might discourage people. Unless TDF/LO can show
> that a substantial proportion of the bugs reported were fixed (or at
> least analyzed). Currently there are over 350 unsolved/unreviewed bugs
> for Windows only...
A good alternative might be that it's obvious that the sessions help to
find bugs in time.
But I agree: many untouched (recent) bugs, does not look nice...
One of the effects of the sessions of course also is that (hopefully)
some more people get aware of and involved in a bit regular work on QA.
> There is simply no time to triage/review/check bug reports if LO keeps
> pumping releases at this pace... The schedule is not realistic for the
> number of people working on QA. It might work fine for Ubuntu which
> has a lot of money and a lot of people...
Hmm should I agree or disagree...
I think it is correct that the enormous speed at which the developers
keep working, is a problem for the people doing QA.
( Related is the great ignorance that I sometime notice, that it is
important to prevent unnecessary and improper bugs, and that on the
contrary, getting clarity as early as possible (before submitting smthng
in BugZilla) helps. )
On the counter side, I think that because of the relatively small steps
in the most releases, that alone does not put a high load on testing.
Thinking of structured testing however (via Litmus) I can imagine that
for some it is not attractive to do that oh so often.
> Also, I think it's really BAD that the *public* wiki page talks about
> a reward for a Bug-hunting competition but there is/was no reward for
> the BHS "hero". How is it different?
I think I have not been secure enough here, which gave confusion and
maybe wrong expectations and a half realised idea . Sorry for that.
Anyway the bug hunt hero is mentioned at the blog: Gustavo Pacheco.
Should have announced that too.
More information about the LibreOffice