[Libreoffice-qa] When it's time to basic bases?

[Joel Madero]

I skimmed this and really...this isn't how the team works. We don't have 
someone come and "insist" and "dictate" how we do our work. If you want 
then the best thing for you to do is "lead by example" and then if it 
works, others will follow. With that, I'm not going to say anything 
specific with regards to anything in this because it's just a lot of 
"insist" on a massive amount of changes and telling volunteers how to do 
their volunteering. Really not how the project works.


Best,
Joel

On 07/29/2015 05:16 PM, Miguel Ángel wrote:
> I have had this mail in the freeze for months, but seeing the 
> discussion about unit test on dev's ML, the interest for the "Help 
> Authoring Extension", and the recent thread in QA ML about how recruit.
>
> There are a lot of fantastic changes and improvements in LibreOffice, 
> what I'm sure is a pride for all of us.
>
> But, always there is a but, my perception on a common feel about 
> LibreOffice, is that it has a lot of improvements but with too much 
> issues.
>
> To find the best way in doing the things, there is not other way than 
> to be a bit critics with our self and test if we are doing the things 
> so well as we can.
>
> What I perceive is that everyone does what she/he likes and how she/he 
> likes, well, maybe a bit exaggerated from my side.
>
> Sure it was fine in the beginning of the project, because at those 
> times the priority was to go forward, but some time ago we should have 
> started to change to look for a better way. 
> http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Looking-for-a-new-approach-in-QA-workflow-tc4052468.html
>
> I know sometimes it's needed even more it's indispensable, force 
> things and go a step forward to moving ahead.
>
> But I'm feel obligated to insist, that at least a very basic steps to 
> follow, need to be established, specially about new improvements.
>
> a) New additions, and specially modifications, implies changes that 
> always affect someone in someway, then have a previous discussion in 
> the right place of the project, finding the pros and cons, to reach a 
> minimal consensus, allows the Author have more security about what is 
> doing, having a first feedback for a better implementation.
>
> b) At least with the first commit of any addition, and with new 
> changes, a breve explanation, about:
>      - What it's the target?
>      - How it supposed it must work?
>
> c) Announce in QA ML when the implementation is ready to verify, with 
> what and how verify by QA, so we can do a truth QA job.
>
> d) Encourage make public the intentions about new works, because maybe 
> others have tried first and someone can help in some way, avoiding 
> duplicated works.
>
> Often putting black on white forces oneself understand better and 
> rethink about what is doing, helping in to do it better.
>
> Help others to help, specially for verification purposes. Sometimes is 
> hard to help people in forums/ML, but even worse, looking for 
> something, when there is not any kind of help in the program and nowhere.
>
> IMHO I's unacceptable having implementations in LibreOffice without a 
> minimal help, for me a job without help, it's not finished and it 
> shouldn't be released.
>
> I have not doubt, that improving the QA only can leads to a less prone 
> to error improvements -> less developing time -> more time for more 
> improvements.
>
> Really, e.g., we can't find a way to have professionals, helping in 
> develop a better QA process, when we have the opportunity.
>
> Is there any problem on having a basic rules?, or it's possible e.g. 
> don't follow the languages rules to write the code.
>
> We must take into consideration that the whole merit for a quality job 
> it's for their Author, so I can't see any issue for their side.
>
> Miguel Ángel.
>
> An open project needs open minds.
>
> _______________________________________________
> List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
> Mail address: Libreoffice-qa at lists.freedesktop.org
> 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/