[Libreoffice-qa] Addressing regressions within a release
bishop.robinson at gmail.com
Tue Apr 23 11:02:53 PDT 2013
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Joel Madero <jmadero.dev at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Joel - How much work would it be to bibisect the regressions for each
>> release? Aside from initial triage/repro, what other QA tasks should
>> take priority over this work?
> For major releases not a problem but for minor releases more of a problem
> because bibisect is only updated per major release.
Ah, okay --
We don't keep on putting new builds into the bibisect repo for X.x
after X.x.0 goes out?
> Identifying regressions is important, ultimately we need to make it much
> easier for users to identify their own regressions (through BSA and maybe
> find a solution within FDO itself). I've been thinking that BSA might use a
> major update where there are just questions in plain language, 1 at a time
> and the next question is dependent on the previous answer.
I'm a big fan of making the BSA more user-friendly.
> Let me cook up a wiki of what I'm thinking and we'll go from there. If there
> are replies to this in the future which I haven't read yet, sorry for
> hijacking :)
Sounds like a plan. And if we can get the BSA working in this fashion,
it could definitely help us with keeping on top of regressions, so you
haven't hijacked the thread too far off course..
More information about the Libreoffice-qa