Hi Andre,
to start with the oldest one, could be really a waste of time. Because I
think, most of the older issues were looked more than once by a QA
member. And most of them ddidn't know, what to do with it. So they let
them untouched. I would suggest to start with the current ones.
It is important to check all issues, if they are valid or not. If there
are 1000 issues, where nobody take a look. We do not know, if there are
important issues in it. The past show that most of these issues are not
critical, but when nobody does this work, we will never know.
Do you have any other suggestion, what to do with the 'unconfirmed'
defects? To ignore them in the future cannot be a goal, or?
And yes it is something for the OOo statistics as well.
Thorsten
André Schnabel schrieb:
Hi Thorsten,
Thorsten Ziehm schrieb:
I see the problems you have with the Quality Assurance of OOo. But I do
not see, that is a problem of the QA processes.
I'd rather say it is not caused by the QA process. But as the root cause
is slowing down the QA process, it is a problem of the QA process.
The job of the Quality Assurance is to assure the quality of the
software. We have to identify the defects before integration or the
regressions or new bugs, when the integration was done. This isn't a
productive part of a feature implementation. It is destructive work.
The QA has to show the development, what they have done wrong. So it
isn't easy for the QA team to find positive aspects in their work,
because we have to show, where the product works wrong. But without
it, the quality will not increase, so the work has to done.
Correct. But the question is "Does the quality increase if I confirm one
of those 1000 uncomfirmed issues"?
Ok - I gave it a try (i have a couple of minutes to walk through some
issues) and was going to pick up some issues. I started with the real
old unconfirmed issues. Issue 23098 was the first I touched.
Ok, reading the issue I was going to close this as invalid - as OOo
behaves as expected, the user simply complained about doing some manual
edits in a formula. I know, that this issue would never be fixed (as we
have thousends of issues that are more important).
But stop - that the issue is not going to be fixed is no critria that
the issue does not exist. So I would need to confirm the issue. Idee, it
is not a defect but an enhancement. Hmm .. enhancements are even less
likely to be implemented. So the effect only of my work would be to
shift the issue form "unconfirmed and therefore not getting attention"
to "confirmed enhancement but also not getting attention". This might
be great for QA statistics but does not help when looking at the "big
picture" at all.
Antoher point - the issue had been closed as duplicate to issue 20495,
which even has a Q-PDC keyword. But unfortunately it now is on the OOo
later stack.
So - if your only incentive is having fun and delivering a good product
you will easily find you are wasting time.
(And this is my only incentive).
André
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
