On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 09:36 -0400, Stephen P. Becker wrote: > Eldad Zack wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Sometimes it becomes a problem whenever a new release or a tricky bugfix > > comes > > up for a certain package. > > To improve QA we can let our userbase help, especially people who use > > certain > > packages quite heavily - they can provide good or even superior QA than > > devs. > > > > I think it would be a nice idea to keep a userlist for anyone who'd like to > > volunteer testing packages they regularly use. > > > > We can consider a web interface for enrolling users to specific packages, > > and > > maybe even get a bug.g.o account for the list, this way a bug can be opened > > for the testers to comment on whenever a change that requires testing or > > maybe just aiding arch teams to stablize packages. > > > > Maybe this was already pitched but it has just occured to me. > > > > Comments? > > > > > > Isn't this why we already have the arch tester position as described by > GLEP 41 (http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0041.html)? > Furthermore, are you saying that users would enroll themselves via this > hypothetical web interface, or that an arch team would do so for users > who have proven themselves to be worthy? If the former, this would be a > serious step back in terms of QA (think about sorting out all the crap > reports from ricer overlay users with OMGFAST CFLAGS from the decent > ones). If the latter, I think the arch tester position already covers > this sort of thing. > > -Steve
didn't he ask for people who know a particular application very well? i think there is a big difference between agreeing to test one particular package since they know it very well and want to make sure noone breaks it vs. being a full AT with all the things they get asked to test
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
