Re: [Libreoffice-qa] QA Weekly Report (W42-2016)

2016-10-25 Thread Nino Novak

Thank you Xisco, for this nice human-readable report!
A real advancement for LibO-QA, I believe :)

Nino

On 24.10.2016 09:34, Xisco Fauli wrote:


What have happened in QA in the last week?  [...]


___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [ANN] LibreOffice 5.0.0 RC3 test builds available

2015-07-11 Thread Nino Novak
Hi Christian,

On 10.07.2015 19:07, Christian Lohmaier wrote:

 The list of fixed bugs relative to 5.0.0 rc2 is here:
 
 http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/pre-releases/src/bugs-libreoffice-5-0-release-5.0.0.3.log

I get a 404 from Apache here -

s/5-0/5-0-0/

http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/pre-releases/src/bugs-libreoffice-5-0-0-release-5.0.0.3.log

:)

Regards,
Nino

___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

[Libreoffice-qa] bug #75554

2015-04-14 Thread Nino Novak
Hi,

just had a glance at #75554 - could not reproduce the hanging, but kind of a
slow rendering of some of the elements in the given test document (they look
like ranges or graphic elements without content - or whatever those white
areas are).

Therefore it seems to take rather long for LibO for initial
rendering/computing the whole document (or whatever LibO does when loading a
file). During this rendering phase, LibO appears a bit impaired (slow/no
reaction to keystrokes). Total document length stucks at 68 pages for half a
minute or more, then jumps to 70, stays again for a while, and finally
reaches 150 after several minutes (estimated).

Caution: I tested with 4422 and master from 2015-03-31_09:12:20
(b024e36ddb3b53163d7a01f6f7b5aadb7a858cd9) both Locale: de_DE
*BUT* with OOO_FORCE_DESKTOP=none because of bug # 86636 [1].

So my results are not representative and I won't report them, but rather
thought to discuss them here.

Nino

[1] https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=86636

___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Advanced Triaging - Tutorials?

2015-04-13 Thread Nino Novak
On 12.04.2015 21:25, Joel Madero wrote:

 There is a bug that needs some advanced QA work on it and I'm curious if
 anyone wants to take a stab at it and try to document the process
 (including screenshots and/or screen captures).
 
 https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=75554
 
 Comment 6 describes what Michael needs.


AFAICS there are three major techniques addressed:

1) bibisecting the problem

2) reducing the document

3) stack tracing with debugging symbols


Techniques 1 + 3 are described in detail in the wiki:

1) https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Bibisect

3) https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_debug
   and also for Windows:
   https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/How_to_get_a_backtrace_with_WinDbg


Technique 2, reducing the document, should be easy to do IMHO (though
tedious for big/complex documents): just remove all the objects from the
document one by one and at each step look if the problematic behavior is
still reproducible. As a first test, you can copy all contents from the
problematic document into a new document to exclude that there is some
(old/inherited) flaw in the document structure.


Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] DLP Projects as products?

2015-02-13 Thread Nino Novak
On 13.02.2015 02:02, Robinson Tryon wrote:

 (I made the words BIGGER)
 https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/enter_bug.cgi

nice :)

The only I'd change is the wording of the titles:

- The projects you are looking for:
+ The projects you are probably looking for:


- These are not the projects you are looking for:
+ There are also several other projects hosted here:


Regards, Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

[Libreoffice-qa] New bugzilla instance: Version information

2014-11-02 Thread Nino Novak
Hi,

browsing through Thommy's UNCO bug list I felt the wish to know which was the
- First (oldest) known version containing the bug
- Last (youngest) version tested still containing the bug.

So my question is: is it possible - does it make sense - or is it already
planned to have these two version informations as separate fields in the bug
table? (didn't find it in the wiki)

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: LibreOffice underline problem

2014-10-25 Thread Nino Novak
Hi Sooraj,

Am 24.10.2014 um 11:01 schrieb sooraj kenoth:

 While using the LibreOffice, I have some problems with the the
 underline. In Malayalam we have a lot of stacked characters. In the
 current way of drawing underline, it strikes the stacked letters. It
 is annoying and it kills the legibility. Please find the screen-shot
 here https://www.libreoffice.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=102053
 
 I have reported the bug here. But they didn't accept. I don't know what to do.
 https://www.libreoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80724

IMHO, here you are right and Joel is wrong: The described behavior is
obviously unwanted and therefore clearly *is* a bug.

Though in this case it might be better characterized as an enhancement
request as seemingly nobody did think about a solution until now and
therefore the requirement make underlining independant from font has not
been considered yet. (At least this is what I am thinking when looking at
the problem).

So I would change it to NEW and Enhancement Request and you should try
to get it fixed. But be patient: probably a completely new underline
functionality must be implemented, which looks like a rather complex task to
me - but I'm not a dev, maybe there exist simpler solutions/workarounds.

my2¢

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice Has Been Reviewed at ListOfFreeware

2014-10-22 Thread Nino Novak
The search on your website does not work.

Regards,
Nino

Am 16.10.2014 um 07:44 schrieb Ubaid:
 Hello,
 
 I am Ubaid from www.listoffreeware.com http://www.listoffreeware.com/.
 This is a popular tech blog that lists best free software out there.
 
 I am sending this mail to let you know that we recently reviewed LibreOffice
 on our website here:
 http://listoffreeware.com/best-free-software-convert-powerpoint-pdf/
 
 Congrats!
 
 If you want to flaunt this review on your website, feel free to use the
 badge that I have attached with this email, or you can also use the code I
 have added below:
 
 a
 href=http://listoffreeware.com/best-free-software-convert-powerpoint-pdf/;
 title=9 Best Free Software To Convert PowerPoint To PDFimg border=0
 src=_http://listoffreeware.com/wp-content/uploads/Reviewed_At_ListOfFreeware.png
 http://listoffreeware.com/wp-content/uploads/Reviewed_At_ListOfFreeware.png_//a
 
 Feel free to get back to me with any questions.
 
 Have Fun,
 
 Ubaid
 Collaboration Manager
 
 w: http://www.listoffreeware.com/ http://www.listoffreeware.com/
 
 
 
 
 ___
 List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
 Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
 Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
 Problems? 
 http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
 Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
 List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
 

___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] request for more boilerplate responses to bug report

2014-09-10 Thread Nino Novak
Am 10.09.2014 um 02:55 schrieb Terrence Enger:

 I have noticed that Urmas has been abruptly closing bug reports that are
 in languages other than English.

What an arrogant behavior :-(

How about first putting them into NEEDINFO state and asking for translation
here or in the l10n list?

There were several localization bugs written in German I remember - they
were perfectly handled by the NL-Team in their native language without any
need to translate them back and forth. This might be true for other bug
reports too as there are still many people in the world not speaking english.

A NEEDSTRANSLATION keyword could also help if we could somehow report those
bugs to an appropriate list (l10n would be my choice if people there agree
but qa might even be better as most qa-interested NL-folks at least lurk here).

just my2¢

Nino

___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


[Libreoffice-qa] PT EN translation needed for bug report

2014-09-10 Thread Nino Novak
Could please someone understanding Portuguese have a look at these bugs and
translate them:

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83681
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83673
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83629

Thanks,
Nino

(proof of concept, QA + l10n lists)
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] PT EN translation needed for bug report

2014-09-10 Thread Nino Novak
I received a translation by PM and added it to the bugs.

Though, the reports don't look very clear to me, therefore the whole action
was of little value I fear. But perhaps now somebody of the QA experts is
able to sort out what the reporters wanted to say.

Nino

Am 10.09.2014 um 18:26 schrieb Nino Novak:
 Could please someone understanding Portuguese have a look at these bugs and
 translate them:
 
 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83681
 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83673
 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83629
 
 Thanks,
 Nino
 
 (proof of concept, QA + l10n lists)
 ___
 List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
 Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
 Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
 Problems? 
 http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
 Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
 List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
 

___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] bug 80220

2014-06-26 Thread Nino Novak
Hello Christian,

Am 26.06.2014 10:06, schrieb Christian Lohmaier:

 But again @whoeverstartsathread:
 use telling summaries, give a link to click on and a small abstract about
 what is all about (in this case: inserted date-field loses
 locale/langauge-property on document reload). It makes life so much easier
 for others...

ups... you're so right...

I'll do my very best :-)

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


[Libreoffice-qa] bug 80220 (was: Are there any germans in the house)

2014-06-25 Thread Nino Novak
Am 25.06.2014 08:47, schrieb Jay Philips:
 Hi All,
 
 I was going through bug 80220 and not able to reproduce it with the
 instructions provided bug the reporter mentions it effect writing
 english documents in a german system environment/localization. If
 someone could look at it, that would be great, as its the only
 unconfirmed bug left in writer since the 1st of may.

I'm going to give it a try.

Nino

___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] bug 80220

2014-06-25 Thread Nino Novak
Am 25.06.2014 10:56, schrieb Nino Novak:
 Am 25.06.2014 08:47, schrieb Jay Philips:
 Hi All,

 I was going through bug 80220 and not able to reproduce it with the
 instructions provided bug the reporter mentions it effect writing
 english documents in a german system environment/localization. If
 someone could look at it, that would be great, as its the only
 unconfirmed bug left in writer since the 1st of may.
 
 I'm going to give it a try.

done.

well, in my case it was easy to reproduce, as I'm using the same
localization and the report is rather well done.

However, I cannot estimate the importance/implications as I rather seldom
use writer myself.

Nino



___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [ANN] LIbreOffice 4.2.5 RC2 available

2014-06-21 Thread Nino Novak
On 21.06.2014 11:56, Jay Philips wrote:

 I assume 4.2 cant become stable until 4.3 becomes fresh. :)

which may be pragmatic but nevertheless sounds strange: it does not make
4.2.x more stable when 4.3.x is released.

If the naming would follow quality criteria, like at least 95% of the
reported bugs have been fixed or similar, it would sound more reliable, IMHO.

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice Bugzilla (migration) Proposal // Acronym

2013-11-11 Thread Nino Novak
Am 10.11.2013 07:24, schrieb Tommy:
 On Sat, 09 Nov 2013 07:28:36 +0100, Robinson Tryon
 bishop.robin...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Hiya,

 As mentioned at the QA Meeting, I've provided a first draft of the
 proposal to migrate from FDO to our own install of Bugzilla:
 https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Bugzilla/LibreOffice_Bugzilla_Proposal


 
 
 very and complete overview
 
 regarding Abbreviation
 
 We need an abbreviation for the new bug tracker that we can use
 instead of FDO.
 Suggestions:
 lo (LO) - e.g. lo#12345 (The lower-case L is ambiguous...)
 libo
 bz - e.g. bz#12345
 bgz
 
 
 I vote for libo
 lo makes me think about J.Lo   :-)
 https://twitter.com/JLo

my preference would be blo (acronym for bugs.libreoffice.org - if this
is the correct URL for the new tracker)

Regards,
Nino

___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [libreoffice-users] Re: QA Triage Contest

2013-07-16 Thread Nino Novak
Am 15.07.2013 19:18, schrieb Tom Davies:

 Errr, that graph is rather confusing me.  It's good when it dips lower,
 right?  Although could that be bad in some way?  Does it mean less bugs
 being reported? 

That's correct, so ideally the chart should simultaneously show the # of
bugs reported.

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] QA Triage Contest

2013-07-15 Thread Nino Novak
Am 11.07.2013 16:36, schrieb Joel Madero:
 Hi All,
 
 So as you all know the contest is over and it was a great success. Just
 under 25% of the bug count dropped but substantially more bugs were
 triaged as we kept up with the daily demand on top of tackling older bug
 reports.

Joel,

can we see the effect graphically?

Cheers,
Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] BSA Versions - Update

2013-07-01 Thread Nino Novak
Am 27.06.2013 21:44, schrieb Bjoern Michaelsen:
 On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:57:44AM -0700, Joel Madero wrote:
 I have added Bjoern to this as he's the one who might be impacted most
 because of the Ubuntu issue.
 
 Can we maybe make the wording more explicit e.g. reached EOL at TDF(*)? 

1) I'd even prefer a positive wording (3.5 Ubuntu or similar) - if
something short + appropriate can be found.

2) just another thought: does it matter *why* we list the 3.5? Why not
leaving it just 3.5 all versions like the other 3.x Versions?

@ Robinson (quoting 27.06.2013, 22:04):

 Where do we want these bugs to end up?

another consideration might be:
Do we want offer a platform to a Joe Average bug reporter to report
bugs against these versions? (Why?)

My suggestion from a QA perspective: We should. At least we should try.
If we get overwhelmed with NOTOURBUGs or FIXED in all other versions, we
should reconsider.

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Release configuration QA builds for Windows from 4-1 branch

2013-05-30 Thread Nino Novak
Am 30.05.2013 09:31, schrieb Fridrich Strba:
 ... we set a tinderbox ...

Hi,

where can I find these builds?

Thanks,
Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Cleaning up QA Nabble and Archive folders from Spam?

2013-05-13 Thread Nino Novak
Am 13.05.2013 00:03, schrieb Thorsten Behrens:

 That's why we run it on fdo - such that you don't have to worry. ;)

But in this case, IMHO we /have/ to worry a bit as there has been
increasing spam impact in the last week or so.

(For me personnaly it's even a bit more annoying as I'm reading the list
via gmane/nntp where I cannot delete individual spam messages).

So I'd tend to set the qa list to moderated as we obviously seem to
have several moderators for the list. Of course, that would cause a
certain delay in case of high frequency postings by (non-subscribed)
devs in a heaty discussion. However, devs could be added to allowed
senders list, so this problem could be reduced.

At least, we could give it a try.

My 2 cents

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Wiki pages cruft cleanup

2013-04-02 Thread Nino Novak

Am 02.04.2013 11:45, schrieb Bjoern Michaelsen:

Hi,

I cleaned up:

  https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Main_Page
  https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development
  https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA


a big +1

Nino

___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


[Libreoffice-qa] Moztrap: Test case export?

2013-03-28 Thread Nino Novak

Hi,

is there an test case export feature from Moztrap?

In what kind of database are the cases stored?

I'm asking because I somehow feel the necessity to organize the cases 
according to my own preferences. Therefore I thought it would be fine to 
export them and experiment locally.


With Moztrap filters it does not seem possible to get fine grained views 
as unfortunately I was not able to tell the filter to use AND as operand 
for the same criterion type (i.e. tag). It always seemed to use OR. So 
tags do not provide enough selection power for now.


Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Page for BSA process in other languages

2013-03-21 Thread Nino Novak

Am 21.03.2013 18:59, schrieb Sophie Gautier:


This is a process, not intended for users of the BSA but dedicated to
the NL QA teams and its organization, of course l10n of the page will
follow so moving the page after will be more difficult. So I would like
to follow the QA project rules here.


IMO the Wiki is a bit messy as we did not care too much about content 
organisation in the beginning.


Personally I'd prefer to have a hierarchically organized Page tree like 
there was in the ooowiki, with a clear hierarchy like

QA
QA/Tools
QA/Tools/BSA
...
Though, with the localized subpages feature (QA/xy...), it's a bit 
difficult to organize a content based page hierarchy.


But we should try, at least IMHO.

Nino






___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Moztrap rights

2013-03-21 Thread Nino Novak

Thank you, Yifan.

and as for your question,

Am 21.03.2013 05:22, schrieb Yifan Jiang:


In addition, take my question as from a curious mind, how come you
need 3 different ids for different roles :) Actually the manager role
will automatically cover all the permissions of Tester and
Creater. Are they for the purpose of testing Moztrap itself?


I always try to work with the lowest possible rights. I've just got used 
to do so since I've started to use linux a while ago.


Kind regards,
Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Manual testing: Litmus or Moztrap?

2013-03-20 Thread Nino Novak

Hi Sophie,

thanks for the quick answer :-)

further remarks/explanations:

Am 20.03.2013 14:46, schrieb Sophie Gautier:

On 20/03/2013 14:09, Nino Novak wrote:



Q1: Is it correct that Moztrap is ready and should be used for manual
testing? Is Litmus definitively obsolete? (there are several links from
the wiki to Litmus)


Yes, the link to Moztrap on the wiki


(ok, that was my most important question.)



Q2: I did not find a localized UI in Moztrap - is there a possibility to
localize it?


We have a 2700 € budget from TDF for that, but not the Django dev yet,
and I didn't have the time to progress on this, so any help is welcome
:) Currently the handling of localization is not possible for UI and for
the tests themselves is quite a mess if there is several languages
(however we can begin with 2 or 3 languages to be able to improve and
check the process even when the localization with be available).
Moztrap is on my next step after the BSA :)


ok, fine.



Q3: Is it planned to support localized bug tags?


What do you mean by bug tags?


sorry, I meant test case tags, those little buttons which you can 
press for filtering test cases. ATM, the tags contain only the very 
basic categories (LibO components and p1-p4 test priorities), so they 
don't need localisation. But if we plan to have some more elaborated 
tags, it might be helpful to have them localized.


Even more (*dream*) I'd really love to have a possibility to tag test 
cases with personal tags in order to create test case collections for my 
own specific purposes.




Q4: What is tested automatically - and what needs to be tested manually?
Is there a list of all automatic tests? or at least a rough concept or
somesuch?


The tests should be in git repo, the page on the wiki for Automated
Tests is here https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Automated_Tests


As I'm not a developer, I'm not familiar with git. Maybe someone 
knowledgable can extract the what is tested by this test info?


Thanks,
Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

[Libreoffice-qa] Moztrap rights

2013-03-20 Thread Nino Novak

Hi Sophie (or whoever has Admin rights over Moztrap),

long ago I created 3 users to test Moztrap,
nnino
nnino2
nnino3

But none of them seems to have Manager rights.

Could you please re-assign rights to these users and grant them the 
following:


nnino - Tester
nnino2 - Creator
nnino3 - Manager

So I can try to do some constructive pieces of work. I don't know how 
far I will get - but thought I'll give it a try.


Thanks :-)

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] 10,000th Bug Report!

2012-10-08 Thread Nino Novak
Am 08.10.2012 19:43 schrieb Joel Madero:
 I just randomly did a pull on FDO of all bugs reported under LibO and saw that
 we've hit the 10,000 (exactly) number. 

Sure?

Isn't it just the maximum number of bugs bugzilla lets you export in a normal 
query?

;-)

Nino
AFAIR I counted ~14k Bugs a couple of days ago.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [proposal] [QA-WE Essen 2012] Bug submission API - How to improve the current system

2012-10-03 Thread Nino Novak
Hi Florian,

Am 03.10.2012 18:43 schrieb Florian Reisinger:

 During the German QA meeting some ideas developed.

thanks for reporting.

 To cut it short, we came to
 the conclusion, that a Bug Submission API (BS-API) would be very helpful. 

Could you elaborate a little the why??

We have 10 years of OOo/LO without such API, so why do you think it would be
very helpful right now? IOW, which *current* problem is supposed to be solved by
this API?

IIRC, the current bottle neck in QA is triaging and early testing, so don't you
think we should better concentrate forces on triaging+testing and not split 
efforts?

However, I don't want to discourage the initiative. If there is a substantial
drive towards developing the API now, do it. But if it takes ressources from
dev/QA people and distracts them from doing their regular tasks, then please
wait two or three months until unconfirmed bug queue approaches Zero and a
performant early testing workflow has been established ;-)


and /ad rem/ :

(Apart from the skepticism above, I'm very much in favour of making bug
reporting easy, of course.)

I made
 a graphic (http://goo.gl/dHWhu)

(Nice workflow, no objections at first glance.)

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


[Libreoffice-qa] Statement draft (was: minutes of the LibreOffice QA call 2012-09-26 1300UTC)

2012-09-27 Thread Nino Novak
Am 27.09.2012 00:13 schrieb Bjoern Michaelsen:

  - better mission statement for QA: proposals? - postponed

Though postponed, I drafted a first proposal on [1].

Feel free to change it according to your *own* ideas, intentions  goals, as
it's up to every single QA activist to bring in his/her special attitude and
motivation. In the end, the sum will make the difference :-)

Nino

[1] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Talk:QA
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Triage Project Update

2012-09-04 Thread Nino Novak
Hi Joel,

Am 04.09.2012 19:18 schrieb Joel Madero:

 I have done a complete update of the google document, this being said, if
 you named a sheet to your name, it's gone. Noel pointed out that a lot of
 the bugs on the sheet were already triaged so I just started from scratch.
 I'm still hoping the web team can help us move this away from google docs
 and get it automated a bit but for now, it is what it is.

I'm not sure to understand what you want to have automated, could you elaborate
just a little bit (or - if you have done so already - point me to the archived
mail)?

Thanks,
Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Triage Project Update

2012-09-04 Thread Nino Novak
Am 04.09.2012 21:52 schrieb Joel Madero:
 Basically it would be really nice to be able to group and assign bugs the
 way that the document does. I think bugs are much more manageable this way
 and we've seen a relative spike in QA triaging activity since starting the
 process this way.

Ok, I see: it makes the process a bit more transparent/obvious. And thus is more
pleasant and possibly invites more contributors.


 Not sure if you looked at the document but it's basically
 manual everything,

I looked at it but could not see what is so special with it...

I'll try to compare (please comment if you find this inadequate):


 I download FDO bugs to Calc, group them based on
 Component,

can be done by a bugzilla query

 then manually copy and paste into groupings of no more than 50.

(is this really that important? for crowdsourcing, it might suffice to do
coordination by e-mail)

 It would be incredibly nice to have the list updated automatically based on
 FDO, group the bugs based on component and then group each of those to a
 max of 50 bugs per group.

if it's a live query, it's current every time you run it

 If each group of 50 could then be assigned to a
 user it would be easy for members of QA to get involved with this project
 and get this back log taken care of.

Ok, I don't know how to build such chunks of 50 bugs using a query - but - is it
so important? Couldn't we use e.g. time periods (weeks or months) to group the
bugs? Then the number would not be constant but who cares?


 I'm not sure if this is possible or
 incredibly time consuming (if it is, probably not worth it).

I don't know either but wanted to understand what exactly is needed and if it's
possible to find (slightly) different solutions which can be implemented more
quickly (or are already existing but not thought of)


 It would be
 even better if we, as the QA team could do a custom group and then it
 could assign us bugs based on that. For instance, I'm a QA member and I
 want to do 20 bugs that are either Writer, Calc or Presentation, and I want
 the oldest bugs (in terms of those that have been left UNCONFIRMED for the
 longest period of time). It could then give me the list and allow me to
 assign myself to the group, and thus prevent other QA members from getting
 those bugs in their list when they do a custom search.

There is a QA Contact field which has not been used extensively (at least
according to my recent search). Could it be used for this purpose? (Rainer? 
Björn?)


 Sorry I felt like that was a bit of rambling, let me know if you need it
 clarified, I can hardly understand it myself ;)

So let me be a bit of a devil's advocate, aka clarification helper :-)

(I've been working in a project as QA helper years ago for several months, they
used excel sheets, so I think I understand the need to master the bugs, and to
make the processes transparent and obvious. And thus lower the entry barrier for
noobs, too btw.)

So my present guess would be:
- asking for a web tool is ok but - if there's no better tools ATM, let's stay
with google docs for the time coming
- but let's also try to use bugzilla itself as much as possible
- we have also the wiki, but I do not see much advantage of using it compared to
a google spreadsheet as it does not support storing/handling structured data.
But it's a web, so we can document all processes nicely and link the documents
in the wiki.

Regards,
Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Triage Project Update

2012-09-04 Thread Nino Novak
Am 04.09.2012 23:05 schrieb Joel Madero:
 I agree that FDO has some benefits but the limitation is really that each user
 is needed to query every time,  the possibility of overlap is great, and no 
 one
 is really responsible for an individual bug until the query is made and 
 someone
 takes the time to look into it. I'm not sure if others would agree but it 
 seems
 like having a group of 50 or so and being able to just do those at your
 convenience makes people more likely to help and feel like their is an end in
 sight for their portion. This is vs. just seeing a never ending list from 
 FDO
 or even having to teach new users (or even not new users) exactly what to
 search for every time with FDO.

As for me (a rather unexperienced QA Newbie), I've chosen a somewhat  different
approach: I've first created two custom searches,

1) all recent bugs (reported within the last two days) for curiosity (just to
see what people report recently)

2) all UNCONFIRMED bugs from the last 14 days

From query 2 I picked a couple of bugs every couple of days to
reproduce/confirm/assign/close/whatever seemed appropriate.

That's just to show a slightly different approach, which is rather simple and
can be handled perfectly within bugzilla itself without any external tool.

Ok, the only problem was, that when a person starts reproducing a bug, it can
happen, that another triager just starts with the very same bug at the same
time. So some kind of lock signal was the only missing thing to prevent
duplication of work. However, this situation did not happen a single time during
my self-chosen BugReviewWeek ;-)

Another advantage: By the above process nobody (virtually) blocks 50 bugs for
a longer time period. Bugzilla queries are very adequate at every time, as all
works with live data.


 Similar to how developers assign themselves bugs and then can just go look at
 their own bugs (My Bugs) it would be nice to have this ability for QA 
 triagers
 but have it somewhat automated since it's just triaging, not programming. In 
 the
 long run (once we're through the back log of 650+ that are really old), it 
 would
 be amazing if we had a team of QA staff that signed up to have bugs auto
 assigned to them for triaging.

We have the libreoffice-bugs@fdo mailing list, which contains (nearly?) every
new bug. Could we use it somehow for this purpose? E.g. by replying to a bug or
forwarding it to the qa list or some such? (Just thoughts, nothing concrete)



 What I imagine:
 
 QA triagers sign up for components they are willing to triage and their 
 max
 load
 New bug is reported, if the bug has a component listed the bug gets auto
 assigned for triaging purposes according to some rule(s)

Personally, I prefer not to sign up for a special component but to pick a recent
bug which kind of attracts me spontanously. But there might be other
opinions/preferences/arguments/approaches.


 For now the google docs works, FDO does not as it is now but I'll discuss this
 further with Bjoern, Petr  Rainer to see if we can come up with something 
 more
 functional than the chaos that is FDO :) Or maybe I'm just not familiar enough
 with FDO to really feel comfortable myself with it, this is more likely than 
 not
 true :)

:-)

I like your initiative. Please don't feel discouraged by my comments, I just
wanted to add a slightly different view. If people like your approach, that's
great! It does not contradict to mine (IMHO), as it's rather obvious if a bug
has been triaged or not. So we can all work together towards our common goal.

Regards,
Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice QA Call 2012-08-24

2012-08-27 Thread Nino Novak
Hi,

on 26.08.2012 22:44, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:

- send list of active wranglers (Rainer) (again?)

Where is this list? Is it a bugzilla query? Is it possible to create a
(monthly?) report/bar graph on who reviewed how many bugs?

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Disquieting Writer bug report -- has anybody ever faced such problems?

2012-08-23 Thread Nino Novak
Hi Roman,

Am 23.08.2012 13:13 schrieb Roman Eisele:

   https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53898

 Even if we ignore all of the reporter's (IMHO completely understandable) 
 anger,
 this bug report is disquieting.

At least it could deserve some sorting out what could be caused by bugs
(real/UX) and what are mere features ,-)

 My question to all: has anybody ever seen such things in Writer?

A little bit, yes. Especially when I'm tired and start to do something I never
did before. Some automatisms drove me crazy. But fortunately I've learned pretty
well to google for switching them off :-)


 Have you got an
 idea how to fix the reporter's problems? IMHO he deserves a good and very 
 polite
 answer, but the most important thing is probably the question how to help him.

It's in the first place a bug tracker, so helping him would be my second
thought. My first thought would be to get him to give us more information.

Therefore, my suggested answer is about:

It would be extremely informative and valueable to have you here and look at
what you are exactly doing.

Software sometimes thinks too much and default behavior can be
counter-intuitive and irritating.

On the other hand, there is rather active development at present and thus bugs
and regressions could have been introduced.

Therefore it would be very nice if you could give a step by step explanation
what you exactly intended to do, what you did, and what the
(intended/unintended) outcome was of every step. So we can address them one by
one. Thank you.

Regards,
Nino

___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] A little confused re: QA and help from users

2012-06-19 Thread Nino Novak

Not really an answer but rather some related questions/thoughts:

Am 19.06.2012 09:47, schrieb Marc Paré:

Like the title says, I am a little confused over QA and help from users.
Do people who are on this list participate in any QA?


Don't know if I understand your question - I'd assume that people 
subscribed to this (libo-qa) list are particularly interested in doing 
QA work plus organizing it.




For example, I usually download any LO Beta series on up. Is there
anything that I could do to help with QA? Testing? I cannot do very long
QA tests but even short tests? No sense in downloading the pre-releases
and not helping out when I can.


I'd assume that this is exactly what many people do: downloading a 
young version from time to time (or even regularly) and trying to 
perform some of their usual daily work with it. This might be called 
some kind of silent QA, because nobody ever learns about the results 
of these attempts. However - hopefully - they'll report back to a list 
or to bugzilla if they encounter any blockers or strange behavior (at 
least I do).


My personal thought is that we should try to better coordinate such 
silent testing as it might be the case that some functions get tested 
thousandfold and others not at all. My hope is that with Litmus/Moztrap 
a more/better coordintated/systematic testing can be achieved. But I 
don't know what the progress is as I've not been following the list for 
quite a while now.




Do we need more help from users specifically for QA on this list? It
looks like the process is pretty much automated or am I wrong?


This question shows that the available info about this part of the QA is 
still incomplete (or not visible enough): What exactly is tested 
autmatically - and what needs (additional) manual testing?


However - personally I'd say that QA needs as many qualified people as 
possible, but that's not enough: the QA work needs better 
coordination/synchronization, too.


Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


[Libreoffice-qa] Bug Lifecycle diagram (was: Re: minutes of the LibreOffice QA call 2012-05-04 14:00 UTC)

2012-05-07 Thread Nino Novak

Hi,

On 07.05.2012 20:47, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:

Hi all,

here are the minutes of the QA call on 2012-05-04 1400UTC.


Thanks.


bug wrangling (Rainer):
- handling needinfo bugs
Question: Do we have a bug lifecylce illustration? For not-so-trained 
people this can be of real help in understanding QA.
I found a generic one at  [1], but our friends at AOO do also have a 
nice one[2] on their QA web[3] which might be worth having a look at ;-)



[1] http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/4.2/en/html/lifecycle.html
[2] see PDF on 
http://www.openoffice.org/qa/ooQAReloaded/ooQA-IssueRules.html

[3] http://www.openoffice.org/qa/


Regards, Nino


  - conclusion: more liberal use of assigned should be ok if in status 
NEEDINFO (only)
AA   - send a proposal for liberal assigned use in NEEDINFO to Rainer for 
review (Bjoern)
- change version master to release branch on branch off?
  see: 
http://rrbd.wordpress.com/2012/05/03/how-can-we-allow-more-purposeful-queries-for-version-master/
AA - create a QA EasyHack Gather own bugzilla requirements (Bjoern)
  - create a wikipage with what we have so far and link to it (Rainer)

community building/communication (Cor?)
- the QA dashboard needs some love
- we should identify top-priority action items after each call, those should
  be done ASAP/to the next call. The are marked AA+ in the minutes (Cor)
AA+- blog about QA EasyHacks (Cor/Bjoern)
AA+- blog about daily build changes/bugs/features from git log (Cor)
  - this should happen best once every 1-2 weeks
  - Rainer looking into this too
  - if git log messages are unparseable to mere mortals, dont hestitate to
email the author about this, this should also encourage good commit
messages (Bjoern)
  - this should also go out to the QA-List and social media
- To grow the QA community and get more people to run and test master we
  should ask people to verify issues once they are marked fixed by dev
AA   - blog about bug verification (Bjoern)
  - the goal is not so much to supervise developer fixes, but the side
effects like:
- more people running master
- more people getting involved/started with an easy task on QA
- verification is positive/uplifting, while confirming bugs might be
  more demotivating

bibisect for 3.5 release branch and 3.6 master (Bjoern):
- no bibisect for 3.5 still (no urgent calls that it is needed yet)
- there is a up-to-date 3.6 bibisect up until 2012-04-28 with more than 60
  full libreoffice installs based on Ubuntu 12.04 LTS
AA - also rebuild the old ~50 3.5 bibisect installs for the next update (Bjoern)
- we should grow bibisect knowledge wide and far to get a stable pool of
  people who can mentor it

Next call will be on 2012-05-18 1400UTC.

Top priority action item as hinted to me by Cor.

Best,

Bjoern
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/



___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] voortgang issue 46250 Libre office 3.5.3

2012-05-04 Thread Nino Novak
On Friday 04 May 2012, 15:42:00 Frank van Lier wrote:

 Dear all,
 
 I want too check the issue 46250 if it is by everybody, so it can help
 to solve the issue in 3.5.4???
 
 Do you help me here to solve the issue by confirm the issue.
 
 Kind regards,
 Frank van Lier

Frank, there's no point in confirming a confirmed issue. 

What's necessary in my eyes is giving evidence, i.e. describing Real Life 
situations, where it's nearly impossible to work around the bug, then pushing 
it to most annoying (37361) and hoping a dev can fix it and backport the fix 
to 3.5. 

My personal opinion: it IS annoying (but I don't need the function often, so 
I'm not the right person to engage with the bug).

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Glitch in fdo Bugzilla? (attachmend assigned to wrong account)

2012-04-25 Thread Nino Novak
On Wednesday 25 April 2012, 15:37:43 dE . wrote:

 File a bug, but probably this's a upstream problem.

done: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49139

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [ANN] LibreOffice 3.5.3 RC1 test builds available

2012-04-24 Thread Nino Novak
Hi,

On Tuesday 24 April 2012, 10:46:16 Petr Mladek wrote:
 klaus-jürgen weghorn ol píše v So 21. 04. 2012 v 10:49 +0200:
  Am 20.04.2012 12:44, schrieb Fridrich Strba:
  
   Builds are now being uploaded to a public (but non-mirrored - so don't
   spread news too widely!) place, as soon as they're available. Grab them
   here:
 The above paragraph explains why we do not spread the information too
 much.

BTW - do you have actual numbers? How many downloads do we actually have and 
how many does the server allow maximally? And about how many bugs have been 
reported in the 24-h-period in the past?

Thanks, 
Nino
(just curious)
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bug Triage best practice: Change or not change assignee?

2012-04-24 Thread Nino Novak
Hi Guys,

can we have a decision in this matter? 

Do we/you need more information/ more time - or is it just different heart 
feelings? 

Shall we make an operational tradeoff by defining a test period of, say, one 
year? 

For me, the matter itself is not that important, I can arrange with both 
procedures, but I'd really like to test Bjoerns hypothesis of community 
empowerment ;-)

So, please, for meritocratic reasons, Bjoern and Rainer, I believe it's up to 
you to decide. (Or is ESC or whatever tdf Board the right gremium? I don't 
know)

Thanks,
Nino
PS - just one thing:

 (*) You should never think of QA as I, even if it sometimes feels that
 way: It will be a selffulfilling prophecy and hamper community growth.

or - to say it positive: Think of QA as 
* qualified constructive feedback for the devs and
* important contribution to enhance and sustain quality and thus acceptance of 
the software
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Glitch in fdo Bugzilla? (attachmend assigned to wrong account)

2012-04-23 Thread Nino Novak
On Monday 23 April 2012, 12:38:40 Nino Novak wrote:


 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48329

another similar looking phenomenon:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48509
here, 2 times the same attachment upload in comments.

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] pls a look at issues 48333 and 48869

2012-04-19 Thread Nino Novak
On Thursday 19 April 2012, 22:25:05 Cor Nouws wrote:

   Bug 48869 - Crash when dragging selected column to the left (edit)

Can't ALT+drag a column under KDE as this combo moves the whole window by 
default. 

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [TESTED] Re: 3.5.1 Online Update testing

2012-03-09 Thread Nino Novak
On Friday 09 March 2012, 03:57:48 Pedro wrote:

 ol klaus-jürgen weghorn wrote
 
  Works now officially with RC2.
 
 It does indeed. But the Update message is still confusing...
 
 LibreOffice 3.5.1 RC2 is available.
 
 The installed version is LibreOffice 3.5.1.
 
 Why would someone who already has version 3.5.1 would want to update to an
 RC release? :)
 
 It should report 3.5.1.2 is available. 

No, it should do nothing - from the end user point of view. 

For a 3.5.1 instal it should only report when a 3.5.2 (final!) update is 
available.

(So the test is not passed in my eyes)

Or does the notifyer behave different in RCs? (If so, it's not an RC!)

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [TESTED] Re: 3.5.1 Online Update testing

2012-03-09 Thread Nino Novak
Hi Christian,

On Friday 09 March 2012, 15:17:26 Christian Lohmaier wrote:

 it is the server that
 makes the decision whether there is an update, not LibreOffice.
 LibreOffice just displays the server's response.

ah, ok, I see!

thanks for clarification ;-)

Bye,
Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

2012-03-07 Thread Nino Novak
On Wednesday 07 March 2012, 08:42:10 Nino Novak wrote:

 Some ideas/wishes/comments from an interested layman:

just an additional thought: 
is there a possibility to define certain test paths? Mean, some kind of 
sophisticated test case which - if passed - contains a couple of simple 
test cases? Thus, result entry could be simplified a lot.
E.g. if there is a testcase, print monthly expenses report from CSV data 
using data pilot, it would encompass opening a file, CSV import, data pilot 
function, data grouping, table printing.

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

2012-03-07 Thread Nino Novak
Hi Bjoern, all,

On Wednesday 07 March 2012, 12:48:25 Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:

 On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 08:42:10AM +0100, Nino Novak wrote:

  [test case tagging]

 Noted.

Thanks :-)

 We will discuss that on the call.

If time allows, fine. 

But on the call you should (IMHO) focus on strategic questions as identifying 
the actual QA bottlenecks  :-)

And of course, bringing all those thoughts from you, Cor and Yifan into an 
adequate coherence :-)

  [Bug Review Weeks]
 
 Go ahead and organize! Dont ask for permission to get started, just do and
 see what works. 

Wasn't meant as question just as idea sharing :-)


  [community test case gathering]
 
...  Are you interested in contributing to this?

(I am a bit hesitant - as my skills are not very prominent in this area. 
But my personal preference ATM is the Review Week. )


 Such things should never be one-way, but an exchange: You write one test you
 care about and let others test it for you, in exchange for you testing the
 stuff that _others_ care about.

If we could manage to put together a system that supports such mutual hand 
washing, it would be fine. But without, I'm a bit lost, how to organize this. 
OTOH, pure Test Case gathering could simply be started in the wiki. So I'd 
tend to start with gathering first and add mutuality later?

Nino

___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC

2012-03-06 Thread Nino Novak
Hi,

On Wednesday 07 March 2012, 02:45:13 Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:

 I would like to set up a LibreOffice QA call to streamline our QA efforts. I
 propose to make our first call on:

Great!

Some ideas/wishes/comments from an interested layman:

 structured manual testing:
  - oneshot populating Ubuntu checkbox for LibreOffice 3.5? (Nicholas Skaggs)
 - syncing checkbox from litmus for LibreOffice 3.6 (Yifan Jiang)

I'd like to add a typical requirement/wish from an occasional tester:
- to have an easy way to set up an individual collection of test cases which 
can be reused (first idea: e.g. by tagging them), so that everybody sees, who 
is subscribed to a test case (and also on which platform). Thereby, manual 
release testing can be kind of self-coordinated without big effort. 

 upstream bugwrangling:
  - 1000 NEEDINFO bugs, what can we do about it? (Rainer Bielefeld, Cor
 Nouws) - general bug stats (Rainer Bielefeld)

idea/proposal from the German discuss list: to organize Bug Review Weeks (in 
contrast/addition to Bug Hunting Sessions) as community events, preferably 
in native languages and only later on international level, so the learning 
curve / barrier can be kept smooth. 

An additional (possibly somewhat crazy) idea: To gather test cases from the 
community by asking What functionality do *you* want to be tested? Provide a 
well-thought-out testcase for your personal most needed function (or most 
annoying regression ;-) .

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] test cases quality; was: Ubuntu/Canonical doing more manual testing for LibreOffice?

2012-03-05 Thread Nino Novak
On Monday 05 March 2012, 10:41:06 Petr Mladek wrote:

 No, we already have a support for translating the test cases. I am sure
 that we will be able to do it even more cleanly in the future.

Is it correct that the Litmus UI is not localized yet? (Is it localizable at 
all?)

Is there (or will there be) a possibility to tag a test case by a tester? So 
that tests can be grouped deliberately? (I'm dreaming about an individual set 
of test cases which I'm sort of subscribed to: thus a great coverage could 
be achieved, if there are a few people and everybody subscribes to a different 
- individual - set).

Thanks,
Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Thread on QA done by l10n teams

2012-03-02 Thread Nino Novak
On Friday 02 March 2012, 18:26:32 Sophie Gautier wrote in libo-l10n:

 http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/l10n/msg04226.html

Hi Sophie, all, 

I'm not subscribed to the l10n list, so I'm trying to answer here. Also, I 
don't know about others, I just can tell what I'm doing myself:

 - Are you doing manual tests on the builds?

yes, if time allows on most of Beta and RC builds

 . using Litmus?

No, just for lack of time.

 - Are you running other types of tests

yes

 .which one?

en passant silent testing :-)

Means: I just install the release in parallel and try to use it as much as 
possible for my daily tasks. With critical documents, I work on a sandbox copy 
and replace the original later (only if all went smooth)

That way, testing does not take much time (just installing the version and 
creating a testing copy each time I want to work on a critical document) but 
is very effective as I perform real tasks (and not artificial test cases) 
with real data (i.e. sometimes large old documents).  

BTW, nobody will notice this kind of testing (of course unless a problem or 
bug comes up). That's why I've suggested to implement some kind of simple 
logging ability into test builds but unfortunately, this seems to be too 
complicated for the devs. 

BTW, I'm doing functional testing only but as I use the localized (German) 
Version, I hope I will notice l10n problems, too (and have so in past).

(I believe, that many many people do such personal silent testing without 
anybody knowing how many tests were performed on what platform and with which 
kind of documents)

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Relase_Criteria wiki page change request

2012-02-17 Thread Nino Novak
On Thursday 16 February 2012, Petr Mladek wrote:

 Nino Novak píše v Čt 16. 02. 2012 v 02:01 +0100:

  [Transclusion] 

 Sounds wonderful! I was not aware of such feature.

oh, there are still many unused wiki features left ;-)
 

  For conveniance, I've attached a patch, hopefully it works ;-)
 
 I have done the changes. I hope that correctly ;-)

Yepp, thanks, works fine :-)


 Anyway, feel free to do such changes yourself. If it works as you say,
 it is just a great improvement.

There must have been a (cache?) problem with exactly this page as I was not 
allowed to edit it (always getting the browse source response only, telling 
me that my email has not been verified yet).

Now I tried again and it finally worked  :-)

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] bibisecting HowTo published on the wiki

2012-02-16 Thread Nino Novak
Hi Bjoern,

could you provide a md5sum of the tar package? 

I'm on slow internet and after downloading more than 7 hours I get 

nino@chef:~/liboqa/Material/bibisect tar --lzma -xf bibisect-3.5.tar.lzma
lzma: (stdin): File format not recognized
tar: Child returned status 1
tar: Error is not recoverable: exiting now

Is the size correct?
nino@chef:~/liboqa/Material/bibisect l b*
-rw--- 1 nino users 785268428 16. Feb 13:08 bibisect-3.5.tar.lzma

Thanks,
Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


[Libreoffice-qa] Relase_Criteria wiki page change request

2012-02-15 Thread Nino Novak
Hi Petr,

could you please update the ReleasePlan wiki page[1] and add onlyinclude 
tags around the table under Blocker Bug Nomination?

I'd like to transclude the table into the German translated page so that it 
gets updated automatically there. 
(I've just tried it with a test page so it has been proved to work)

For conveniance, I've attached a patch, hopefully it works ;-)

Thanks,
Nino

[1] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Release_Criteria--- Release_Criteria.txt	2012-02-16 01:35:03.256719428 +0100
+++ Release_Criteria-modified.txt	2012-02-16 01:45:51.616725867 +0100
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@

 == Blocker Bug Nomination  ==

-Set '''severity''': ''blocker'', add comment and dependency to the '''meta bug''':
+Set '''severity''': ''blocker'', add comment and dependency to the '''meta bug''':onlyinclude
 {| width=100% class=wikitable border=1 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2
 |-
 ! Release Version  !!Task Meta Bug !! Blocker bugs !! Most annoying bugs !! Remarks
@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@
 |[https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMEDbug_status=NEWbug_status=ASSIGNEDbug_status=REOPENEDfield0-0-0=blockedproduct=LibreOfficequery_format=advancedtype0-0-0=anywordssubstrvalue0-0-0=6order=bug_severity%2Cpriority%2Cbug_idquery_based_on=  annoying bugs] (**)
 |
 |}
-
+/onlyinclude
 (*) Check also [https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?bug_severity=blockerquery_format=advancedbug_status=UNCONFIRMEDbug_status=NEWbug_status=ASSIGNEDbug_status=REOPENEDproduct=LibreOffice all blocker bugs].
 :
 (**) Check also [https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?negate0=1keywords=regression%2C%20query_format=advancedkeywords_type=allwordslist_id=36720field0-0-0=blockedtype0-0-0=anywordssubstrvalue0-0-0=6%2037361%2035673resolution=---product=LibreOffice regressions not handled in most annoying bugs] and [https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?keywords=regression%2C%20keywords_type=allwordslist_id=36698resolution=---query_format=advancedproduct=LibreOffice all regressions].
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] credits for people doing QA

2012-02-04 Thread Nino Novak
Hi Cor,

Am Samstag, 4. Februar 2012, 23:39:02 schrieb Cor Nouws:

 Today with my little QA presentation at FOSDEM, one person asked about
 how we give credits to people doing this work.
 Well, not structural/in a visible place, as far as I know.
 
 What about adding something here:
http://www.libreoffice.org/about-us/credits/  ?
 
 We need to have some rule of course, based on which people get mentioned.
 Suggestions remarks?

Good question! (It's IMHO the question, how we measure meritocracy.)

We have the commit count for devs, the edit count for wiki contributions, so 
what if we start with the number of reported bugs in a first approximation? 

(In my eyes, not only the count but also the value of a contribution should  
count, but how to define the value? So, the count should be a good start)

Nino



___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] preparing QA talk for FOSDEM

2012-01-29 Thread Nino Novak
Am Samstag, 28. Januar 2012, 14:14:15 schrieb Luc Castermans:
 Op 27-01-12 16:17, Cor Nouws schreef:
  Hi Nino,
  
  Nino Novak wrote (27-01-12 15:09)
  
  Personally I have the impression / concern that Quality is getting one
  of the main challenges of LibreOffice as it seems to decrease more
  and more 
  I disagree with you.
  And it's not an answer to my serious question. Sorry about that.
 
 Seems you guys talk opinion wise.   Could we have some facts ?

No hard facts from my side, only feelings, impressions, concerns. I'm using 
LibO myself and watching mailing lists, so my feelings are simply based on 
what I experience and what I read in the lists.

However, my wish to monitor bug-free usage comes exactly out of the desire 
to collect some (hard) facts. 

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] preparing QA talk for FOSDEM

2012-01-27 Thread Nino Novak
Am Freitag, 27. Januar 2012, 00:05:48 schrieb Cor Nouws:

 Ideas, things to add?

Personally I have the impression / concern that Quality is getting one of the 
main challenges of LibreOffice as it seems to decrease more and more - and 
software acceptance to a good deal depends on quality (especially in corporate 
environments).

So anything that /really/ raises quality is good ;-)

My own ideas go into the direction of monitoring bug-free usage, e.g. by 
logging main user actions (module used, opening/closing files, menu path, 
toolbar icon klicks and so on) into a simple text file. But I really don't 
know if this is a good subject to talk about at FOSDEM.

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/


Re: [Libreoffice-qa] 3.5.0 QA ... from BHS 1 to BHS 2

2012-01-12 Thread Nino Novak
Hi,

please keep in mind that I'm by no means a QA expert, but sometimes I'm good 
in expressing thoughts and fears of ordinary people ;-)

On Tuesday, January 10, 2012 09:58:48 AM Michael Meeks wrote:
 On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 16:20 +0100, Nino Novak wrote:

 ...

   So - I'd love to understand this desire for less frequent releases
 better :-) After all, we have tinderboxes churning out at least daily
 releases (in theory), perhaps several a day if we are lucky.

I think, people simply need enough time as daily spare time window might be 
small: imagine about 2-3x weekly 1-2 hours, but often there's much less. So in 
good times they can install one release per week and test it for one or two 
1-2 hours periods in the same week. That's it. 

As for the frequency: I for my part prefer to have a most-recent build for 
testing, so no - the release frequency should IMHO *not* decrease. But somehow 
I'd also like to have the feeling of having enough time to test in depth. 
Here a clearer prioriritization might be helpful.

I don't know if it's important, but I just wanted to mention that I very 
rarely take the time to test a release according to a fixed testing plan 
(Litmus etc) but most often just try to do my usual office work on copies of 
my original documents in a sandbox (and if nothing suspicious happens, after 
3-4 weeks those sandbox document copies become masters again and replace the 
original documents). And my impression is, that many people do this en 
passant testing and thereby discover problems or bugs. 

 
   What is the concern about having new RC's ? is it that you think
 developers will not care about and/or test any bugs that appear in
 something one release-candidate old ? [ that seems unlikely if it is a
 serious bug ], or ? ...

For /serious/ bugs, well, ok, but what if they are not-so-serious? Where's the 
threshold? 

And, to raise a different issue: People might well feel overwhelmed by the 
release frequency. Lost in release fusillades, so to speak. I personally have 
decided to concentrate on testing the most recent code line whenever possible. 
But many people still do not understand the release plan, and in addition do 
not know, how they can be (or make) sure that their test install will not 
interfere with their productive version. The QA-FAQ does not address this 
issue, you have to search for infos in the wiki...

So in summary, it may be a little bit the Mohammed - mountain problem. Cor's 
activities are a good starting point and most appreciated :-)

In the end, we have the common goal to make the software working as smoothly 
as possible. 

 
  Fourth, which is more an open question, how the success of Release QA
  could be monitored intelligently. My (naive) wish would be to have
  usage numbers, let's say
  - how often a Release has been launched on which OS platform without
  failure
   We have some download statistics of those that can be extracted (I
 suspect), and we have the on-line update statistics too which may give
 some yard-stick for successful launch ;-) usually the app has to stay
 alive for a little while to do that request.

(I'd appreciate if something like that could be implemented, but the effort 
should be kept low)

 
  - how often which module has been started
  - how many documents have been created/edited/viewed successfully
  - which particular functions have been called how often successfully
 
   These other phone-home things are more tricky, needing coding support,
 but it's of course a good idea to ensure good code coverage. Ideally -
 I'd like to reduce the burden on human QA though, so we're investing and
 encouraging (where we can) fast automated test that run during the
 compile: so you should never get a build that has pathaological failures
 [ assuming our test are complete enough ;-]. Hopefully that makes the
 process of QA more difficult  rewarding ;-) but of course there is
 always room for lots of improvement, and some things are hard to test.

All the above written does not relate to machine tests, only to manual tests. 
We should keep these two different approches well separated in discussion as 
they have different needs each one. For automated tests, you need skilled 
people. Manual testing can be done by Joe Average, at least in theory.

 
   One thing that is really nasty to test is the new
 header/footer/page-break stuff. I get intermittent leakage of
 page-breaks in documents (with several rendered on the screen); -but-
 while (after editing a document) I can reproduce them nicely, if I save
  re-load in another instance - I cannot ;-) so - there is a real need
 for some from a clean document reproduction steps for those issues -
 some of which may be races too ;-) help there much appreciated.

(others have to step in here, as I didn't test header/footer much yet - except 
that I wondered that deleting header/footer cannot be undone :-( )

Nino
___
List Name

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] QA-Team Web page

2012-01-05 Thread Nino Novak
Hi Rainer,

Am Donnerstag, 5. Januar 2012, 15:22:41 schrieb Rainer Bielefeld:

 I started a new QA-Team Page [2]

why didn't you just update the existing page? (just wondering - so we now have 
two pages, and nobody will know which is the actual one?)

Nino
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/