[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    QA Team [JRT]
From:       James Richard Tyrer <tyrerj () acm ! org>
Date:       2004-01-29 20:13:04
Message-ID: 40196950.3060301 () acm ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

First, I am willing to participate in any organized effort -- contact me by
private e-mail.

However, I also wanted to blog about this a little:

Our current development model (Bugzilla) is set up as though we had a QA
department (but we don't).

A simple cure for this is that if you report a bug you need to appoint
yourself the advocate for that bug.  If possible make test cases but in any
case:

Until the next release, you should follow the progress in fixing the bug.

When the next release is made, you should validate that the bug has been
fixed in the release -- like the QA department does.

Unfortunately, it is possible that developers will not appreciate this.

My experience with bug:

http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73379

has been a little mixed.  Please read in comment #3:

> I don't see how this can be the wrong widget. What is wrong about saying
> the file already exists and suggesting a new name?

> IMO, this is no showstopper for KDE 3.2. Most people don't even know
> they can divide the window in two.

And comment #9.  I have always suspected that bugs are being marked as 
fixed when they actually aren't.

Attitudes such as this are not what we need to get a high quality produce.

In any case, the coders need to realize that it is the job of the QA team 
to see that the bugs get fixed -- that by doing this job that they are 
helping with the development of high quality code.

NOTE: most of bug 73379 has been fixed, but "Test case #1" still fails, so 
it will be retitled again.

--
JRT

 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]