From: Caio Tiago Oliveira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [qa-dev] Automated GUI Testing: What is a 'global' CWS and how do we test it? Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 02:48:50 -0300
> I'm not requesting Sun QA'ing for Mac OS X, I'm just requesting the > nomination process should take into account the QA results for Mac OS X > if someone (from the community or a volunteer from Sun) does the job. Okay. Assume you found some defects in a cws marked or ready for QA. Then communicate with QA representable or/and members who has a commit right to ask for integration of your patches. If rejected this might be a problem. I belive this is not the case. After marked as ready for QA, it depends. IMHO, once global cws is `approved by QA' it is very hard to back to the status to `new'. It wastes the time and resouce of Hamburg QA team. As Jogi wrote, this is a hard task. If you have objection for this process, then, MacOSX must be a supported platform for nomination process. Please ask othres (Hamburg RE) to implement it. BTW: can somone forward a message from EIS when a created cws are global one to warn other porters to check porting issues? > From my point of view, for everything I've read about it: a CWS should > not introduce new issues. I agree. But for which platforms? You may want to add MacOSX here. > Are you saying that Mac OS X, FreeBSD and everything other than GNU > Linux/Windows/Solaris should stay forever as second class platforms, > regardless their maturity level? This is what I cannot decide. This is what the Hamburg RE can decide. However, I think - it is very good idea to restrict primary platforms as Windows/GNU/Linux and Solaris. Of course, if resouce is available, +1 for MacOSX. > > e. there are not so many unfortunate CWS like mingport03. > > If so many, we expect even stability and we cannot do porting! > > Could you rephrase this? > I believe I misunderstood you here. Usually, there are not so many cws like breaking other ports. I belive OOo source code are very clean and CWS process is usually very good .IIRC for FreeBSD, I have only one or two FreeBSD patches during OOo 2.1 to 2.2. For MacOSX, there are, but not so many in my impression, right? I could be very lazy for porting. If so many global CWS are introduced at a time, we cannot do porting. This might happen for early development stage of 3.0. In such a case, we should wait for while and then do a porting and stablize. If MacOSX is primary platform for nomination process, every small build breaker must be taken care carefully. But this is not what I can do... [So - that's why I prepared MacOSX packages for new chart2. Checking buildablity. of course other purpose as well.] Another problem: Hamburg team uses slightly different build system (do not use configure). Sometimes we encounter build issues. Still have a question? -- Nakata Maho ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
