Hello,
I am the developer of a Maemo Extras Package
(http://maemo.org/packages/view/babyphone/) and made a bug-fixing update
of it a quarter of a year ago.
After 2 weeks I had 2 positive tester votes and 7 positive votes in
total. Since then, nothing changed on the status. Thus, it is still
On Friday 22 July 2011 16:00:31 Roman Morawek wrote:
I propose to change the QA process to accelerate extras promoting.
A package should be promoted after either:
- 1 tester vote
- 4 votes in total
- 2 months of staying in testing without negative vote
I support this for updates to existing
On Thursday 27 January 2011 22:02:36 you wrote:
Maybe we could make it easy to leave a numeric rating + let the user
pick one of a pre-defined set of labels (that's how it is done in
Little Big Planet - it's mandatory to give a numeric rating after
playing a community-created level, the label
On 01/27/2011 10:24 AM, ext Thomas Perl wrote:
2011/1/27 Riku Voipio riku.voi...@nokia.com:
For new versions, the set of checks should still be shorter and less
votes needed. Basically the only check to be done is has the new
version any regressions compared to the version already in extras.
Sorry for my sucks English.
I have already written both on the forum that the Council, pointing out that
there are still many applications in extras-testing. Some can be already
unlocked, but maybe in the meantime some Maintainer were lost. For
example, I sent emails to some of these maintainer,
Hi!
2011/1/27 Riku Voipio riku.voi...@nokia.com:
On 01/25/2011 05:24 PM, ext Andrew Flegg wrote:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 15:03, Felipe Crochik fel...@crochik.com wrote:
A new version of an existing application should have a lower barrier to
promotion than a new application.
It's obvious;
Hi,
i have the same problem with my two applications. kfzcheck [1] and
kfzcheck-extras [2]. Because many people don't use extras-testing and
extras-devel. Lots of people haven't seen the apps and can decide if it
can be useful and give feedback to me for improvements.
The two apps are now in
On czw, 2011-01-27 at 15:16 +0100, Patrick Beck wrote:
Because many people don't use extras-testing and
extras-devel. Lots of people haven't seen the apps and can decide if
it can be useful and give feedback to me for improvements.
There are a lot of people using extras-testing and even
Hi,
On 27 January 2011 16:05, Tomasz Sterna to...@xiaoka.com wrote:
There are a lot of people using extras-testing and even extras-devel.
Not many of them know or care about the web voting and approval system.
+1 :)
or better... we need a way to let people know if the application
listed come
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 15:09, a.gra...@gmail.com a.gra...@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 January 2011 16:05, Tomasz Sterna to...@xiaoka.com wrote:
There are a lot of people using extras-testing and even extras-devel.
Not many of them know or care about the web voting and approval system.
or
-boun...@maemo.org
[mailto:maemo-developers-boun...@maemo.org] On Behalf Of a.gra...@gmail.com
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 10:09 AM
To: Tomasz Sterna
Cc: maemo-developers@maemo.org
Subject: Re: adaptation of Extras QA hurdles
Hi,
On 27 January 2011 16:05, Tomasz Sterna to...@xiaoka.com wrote
Sorry wrong button Hit reply and not reply to all this is the
message I just sent to Andrew:
-- Forwarded message --
From: Felipe Crochik fel...@crochik.com
Date: Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: adaptation of Extras QA hurdles
To: Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org
Hi,
On 27 January 2011 16:25, Felipe Crochik fel...@crochik.com wrote:
Sorry if the question is silly but why do you think enhancing HAM is better
than creating a new application based on appdownloader, FAP and KISSTester?
all I know is that all people I asked to, told me that they would
Hi,
at the beginning of the n900 device with maemo 5 many people have seen a
risk at installing applications from extras-devel. I think the most
important problem was the full rootfs (not optified). I mean after pr1.2
was the problem no more possible, but the users has still not installed
apps
]
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 10:29 AM
To: Felipe Crochik
Cc: maemo-developers@maemo.org
Subject: Re: adaptation of Extras QA hurdles
Hi,
On 27 January 2011 16:25, Felipe Crochik fel...@crochik.com wrote:
Sorry if the question is silly but why do you think enhancing HAM is
better
than
of Extras QA hurdles
Hi,
at the beginning of the n900 device with maemo 5 many people have seen a
risk at installing applications from extras-devel. I think the most
important problem was the full rootfs (not optified). I mean after pr1.2
was the problem no more possible, but the users has still
Sorry I did again... Here is the message:
-Original Message-
From: Felipe Crochik [mailto:fel...@crochik.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 11:01 AM
To: 'a.gra...@gmail.com'
Cc: 'maemo-developers@maemo.org'
Subject: RE: adaptation of Extras QA hurdles
That is scary :)
I have never
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 15:29, a.gra...@gmail.com a.gra...@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 January 2011 16:25, Felipe Crochik fel...@crochik.com wrote:
Sorry if the question is silly but why do you think enhancing HAM is better
than creating a new application based on appdownloader, FAP and KISSTester?
: Thursday, January 27, 2011 10:54 AM
To: maemo-developers
Subject: Re: adaptation of Extras QA hurdles
BTW. It will be great when anybody can test and vote for kfzcheck ;) I
know it was a bit promoting :)
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Felipe Crochik fel...@crochik.com wrote:
I have to say that I like how the 3 of them work. If we are going to take on
making a better tool we should aim high. It needs to be more than an
application manager it needs to be a tool for the user to find and decide
On Thursday 27 January 2011 18:07:32 Andrew Flegg wrote:
Unless we take extraordinary (and almost certainly self-defeating)
actions like requiring KISStester to be installed to use any software
from Extras-(devel|testing).
In fact, I would very specifically argue against such an approach. The
...@gmail.com; maemo-developers@maemo.org
Subject: Re: adaptation of Extras QA hurdles
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Felipe Crochik fel...@crochik.com wrote:
I have to say that I like how the 3 of them work. If we are going to take
on
making a better tool we should aim high. It needs to be more than
Hi Attila and all,
2011/1/27 Attila Csipa ma...@csipa.in.rs:
On Thursday 27 January 2011 18:07:32 Andrew Flegg wrote:
Unless we take extraordinary (and almost certainly self-defeating)
actions like requiring KISStester to be installed to use any software
from Extras-(devel|testing).
In
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 15:57, Felipe Crochik fel...@crochik.com wrote:
Would we still have the requirement of official tester vote(s) or any
community member vote will have the same weight?
I'm not sure what you mean. As I understand it at the moment, the
requirement is that you get 10 votes
Hello Andrew,
On 25.01.2011 16:24, Andrew Flegg wrote:
Agreed. Proposal:
* The first page of http://maemo.org/profile/list/category/products/ are
given track-record status.
* Other accounts can be given track-record status by two developers
who have track-record status or by
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 13:18, Roman Morawek li...@morawek.at wrote:
I just want to remark, that this proposal would not change anything in
my specific situation. I'm not listed in the top-products-karma-page and
would still need 10 votes, which seems to take very long time.
Indeed. This is,
On 01/25/2011 05:24 PM, ext Andrew Flegg wrote:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 15:03, Felipe Crochik fel...@crochik.com wrote:
A new version of an existing application should have a lower barrier to
promotion than a new application.
It's obvious; but even a minor change can have an enormous impact.
Hello,
I like to initiate one more discussion on the Maemo Extras QA process.
I uploaded a new release of my application
(http://maemo.org/packages/view/babyphone/) on 5th of November, so more
than 2.5 months ago. Right now, I have 6 positive votes (including mine)
- thus 60% of the demanded
Hi Roman,
Roman Morawek wrote:
I uploaded a new release of my application
(http://maemo.org/packages/view/babyphone/) on 5th of November, so more
than 2.5 months ago. Right now, I have 6 positive votes (including mine)
- thus 60% of the demanded hurdle. I guess my application is not one of
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 9:15 AM
To: Roman Morawek
Cc: maemo-developers@maemo.org
Subject: Re: adaptation of Extras QA hurdles
Hi Roman,
Roman Morawek wrote:
I uploaded a new release of my application
(http://maemo.org/packages/view/babyphone/) on 5th of November, so more
than 2.5 months
Felipe Crochik wrote:
snip
A new version of an existing application should have a lower barrier to
promotion than a new application.
Yes. Instead of 10 there should only be 1 required vote. That one vote
should not be the developer. No more than 3 votes thought.
snip
We could put this
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 15:03, Felipe Crochik fel...@crochik.com wrote:
I assume we all agree that the two most important goals for testing are
making sure that the developer has good intentions and that the
application will not break anything. I know that in a perfect world we
also would
] On Behalf Of Andrew Flegg
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 10:24 AM
To: Felipe Crochik
Cc: Dave Neary; Roman Morawek; maemo-developers@maemo.org
Subject: Re: adaptation of Extras QA hurdles
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 15:03, Felipe Crochik fel...@crochik.com wrote:
I assume we all agree that the two
33 matches
Mail list logo
