As far as I know, the latest process for getting QA attention on B2G
bugs is documented at [1]. However, it's not clear to me which bugs are
actually checked for the qawanted flag. From my experience I feel like
only bugs in the Firefox OS product are checked, and often bugs filed in
other products get missed.
For example, [2] is a list of bugs in the Core product whose platform is
marked as Firefox OS and have the qawanted keyword on them.
I don't know who is "officially" responsible for responding to QA
requests on these bugs, but it seems that they are falling through the
cracks, and I would like to avoid that. I see only a few options:
1) Ensure that any bugs that need QA assistance from the B2G QA team are
moved to the Firefox OS product. This seems inefficient since in some
cases we already know that it's a bug in the core platform (e.g. a
graphics bug) and filing it in the Graphics component is more likely to
get it fixed faster.
2) Get the B2G QA team to use a query such as the one above to find
qawanted-flagged bugs in other products, as long as the platform is
"Firefox OS". This would be my preferred solution. The backlog of such
bugs is not large; [3] is a query that searches for all qawanted bugs
across all non-B2G products with a Firefox OS platform, and as of right
now it shows only 8 bugs.
3) Start a new QA team solely responsible for dealing with bugs in other
products (e.g. Core) and having cross-platform expertise so they can
deal with bugs like these.
I would also really like it if somebody updated the bugzilla queries on
[1] since a lot of them seem out of date. I often use the bugzilla
queries on [4] to verify my bugs will get auto-uplifted and blocker
nominations will get responded to, and I would love to be able to use
bugzilla queries on [1] to verify that my QA requests will also get
responded to. In a sense the documented queries are like interfaces - if
my bug doesn't show up in the query then I tagged it wrong and I need to
fix it; if it shows up but doesn't get responded to then the fault is on
the other side. Documenting these interfaces can help tighten our
process up so less things get missed.
Does anybody have any thoughts on this issue? Any suggestions on who
else should be CC'd on this to make the appropriate decisions?
Cheers,
kats
[1] https://wiki.mozilla.org/B2G/QA/Triage
[2] http://bugzil.la/keywords:qawanted+product:core+os:gonk
[3] http://bugzil.la/keywords:qawanted+-product:"Firefox OS"+os:gonk
[4] https://wiki.mozilla.org/Release_Management/B2G_Landing
_______________________________________________
dev-b2g mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-b2g
