Gervase Markham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> John Marmion wrote:
> >
> > > John Marmion wrote:
> > > >
> > > > We feel that there was no real conviction to QA this patch despite
> > > > the fact that we had made it available as early as the 20th April.
> > >
> > > Who were you looking for QA from? If you wanted it from mozilla.org, did
> > > you co-ordinate with Asa?
> >
> > Forgive my ignorance but who is Asa?
>
> Asa is Asa Dotzler, [EMAIL PROTECTED], the head QA person (among the many
> hats he wears) for mozilla.org. I would have thought he'd be the first
> point of contact if QA resource is required.
>
> > The problem is that changing the Address Book in Mozilla
> > means that the Commercial Tree and in particular the
> > AIM stuff needs to be tested. This testing is outside
> > of our control.
>
> Ah. This would be a confusion between mozilla.org and Netscape. It may
> well be that the Netscape commercial tree gets spanked when Mozilla
> checkins happen. This is something that all Mozilla distributors have to
> deal with. But holding up Mozilla checkins because Netscape have not
> allocated sufficient resource to keep up with the pace of our development
> is, IMO, wrong.
As far as I'm aware, the thing holding this up for checkin has always
been review, not Netscape QA. It's true that Netscape would like to
QA their commercial builds first, but they still have time to do that
before the review completes. If there's still a testing issue by the
time sr= has been granted, that's probably not enough to hold up
checkin to the mozilla tree. But let's see if that actually turns out
to be a problem.
Dan
--
