[Libreoffice-qa] How to change QA processes: was: What should we do with bugs filed against Extensions/Templates?

[Petr Mladek]

Rainer Bielefeld píše v Ne 07. 04. 2013 v 10:22 +0200:
> Petr Mladek schrieb:
> 
> > Ah, this sounds pretty bossy.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> yes, may be. My tone reflects my exception. I see too much unqualified 
> discussion. Before thinking about changes everybody should have have 
> understood the current system, why it is how it is?

Of course, the new people does not have such a big experience like you
but I would not say that they are unqualified. They have good points and
interesting ideas. In each case, they need to get the experience some
way and creativity is always valuable.

>  But I am such kind of Swiss wrist watch maker.

And I really appreciate your work.

> Quality Assurance has to do something with quality, and we have to 
> observe and grant the quality of your own work. And here I have serious 
> concerns.
> 
> Let's take "Bug 63210 - EDITING: Superscript Defaults incorrect". Joel, 
> please excuse me for taking that example, it was the first but I saw 
> this morning in my "New bug reports" folder, and it's a typical one for 
> observations I see with rising number in the last months. The goal seems 
> to be to get the reports out of the QA process as quick as possible 
> (because we have so many untouched reports), but I do not like that way, 
> that only increases the amount of unfixed confirmed bugs. If we cans 
> save 5 developer minutes at each bugs with careful research, that's a 
> potential of 55 hours for the 679 bugs what changed to NEW in March 
> 2013. That's 1 work of week for a busy developer!

I see the point but there are other points. Important part of the bug
triage is prioritization. We would be in troubles if half of new bugs is
perfectly triagged and ready for fixing but the rest is not touched at
all. It would mean that some important regressions might get unnoticed
for a long time.

I think that Joel tries to optimize the work. He tries to deal with new
bugs with the given resources. I think that it is very reasonable as
well. I am pretty sure that he will do more investigation if we get more
hands on it. Anyway, developers could always put the bug back in
NEEDINFO if there is not enough information.

I think that it is great to have so many productive people around. We
all could teach from each other.

For example, I am surprised how many details Rainer found about the bug.
It would be great to share more details about the setup that probably
allows to test many versions in parallel.


Best Regards,
Petr