Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC
Bjoern Michaelsen píše v St 07. 03. 2012 v 12:48 +0100: On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 08:42:10AM +0100, Nino Novak wrote: 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 ;-) . I really like the idea. Sounds like a great approach to motivate people for writing test cases. 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. I would not be afraid of this. We need more test cases right know, so we should be opened for any of test cases. We just need someone (more people) that would watch the situation, move the test cases into the right categories by priority, fix/reject confusing or strange test cases and teach others. I suggest to do something like with the developer mailing list. New contributors might send test cases to this mailing list. Yi Fan or other experienced QA people will review them and put into Litmus. If a contributor is good, she might get write access and help with reviewing test cases from others. This is already described at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Test_Cases_Contribution which is linked from http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Test_Case which is linked from http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA Best Regards, Petr ___ 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
Nino Novak píše v St 07. 03. 2012 v 21:47 +0100: 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? We need someone who move the test cases from wiki into Litmus or any other tool. Also I suggest to send new test cases to this mailing list because it is more interactive and it works well on the developers mailing list. Note that wiki is fine for writing but it is not practical for running test cases. Please do not ignore Litmus until we have a better tool. Rimas, Yi Fan, and others already put a lot of effort into improving Litmus. It is usable. We are even able to somehow translate description of the test cases. IMHO, the main problem is that we are currently not able to translate UI and test cases titles. I am not sure how complicated it would be to fix this and how it works in other tools. Note that migration to other tool should be easy. We just need to move the test cases description. The bigger problem is to write and sort the test cases. We should not be afraid of Litmus. We should just use its features until we have anything better. It is here and running. Best Regards, Petr ___ 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 -- dial in details
Hi, On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 02:45:13AM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote: Hi all, I would like to set up a LibreOffice QA call to streamline our QA efforts. I propose to make our first call on: Friday, 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC [...] I will post the phone conference numbers later. Dial-in numbers for countries outside Germany can be found at: http://www.talkyoo.net/main/telefonkonferenz_internationale_rufnummern Dial-in numbers inside Germany are: +49 40 18881000 (Hamburg, landline) +49 40 95069970 (Hamburg, landline) +49 89 60893 (Munich, landline) +49 1570 3336000 (vistream mobile network) Room: Room number: 53 71 38 No participant PIN is required All calls will be recorded All participants can speak Note that you can also use Skype to join the call. Best, Bjoern (who is fighting of a cold) ___ 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
Hi Yifan Jiang, On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 10:39:57AM +0800, Yifan Jiang wrote: Hi Bjoern, Thanks for inviting and coordinating everything ( sorry for the late reply, it was a busy week ) :) I'll try to join when it is possible, though the time could be a bit late in China. An obstacle is I am not sure if it is possible to make a call successfully from home ( I don't have a tie line at home ), will that be an SIP call or something else? It should be possible to join the call via Skype. Will that work for you? 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC
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
Hi Bjoern, *, Thanks for the invitation and the initiative! Bjoern Michaelsen wrote (07-03-12 02:45) I would like to set up a LibreOffice QA call to streamline our QA efforts. I propose to make our first call on: Friday, 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC As life shows now, I'll be able to join. And I'll try to keep it that way. I hope to repeat this call biweekly to discuss and coordinate ongoing QA issues, it would be great to have QA-contributors for the topics below able to join this call. prototype agenda for the first call: I have some explicit ideas on some of the items. Should we attempt to exchange those before the meeting, or at least mention them (briefly)? [...] If there are additional issues needing to be discussed, please reply to this mail with your addition. Yes, I have one. Looking at the developer community, I see that there is a conscious, consequent approach, executed with talent and lots of time(presence), of encouraging and guiding developers, especially of course the new ones. Thus making people feel comfortable, learning to find their way, enabling to do them things that they like and are useful for the project etc. Though we have quite some people engaged in QA, with enthusiasm and talent, I think we miss some drive like that. Obviously QA work is not the same as development work, and maybe people also (partly) step in from a different perspective. Thus a one-to-one copy of the approach, that is so successful at the developer side, will not do. But of course, key elements are encouragement, guiding, joy in the work, sharing success, acknowledgement etc (hope I choose all the right words ;-) ) I'm not sure if this is an easy to solve issue. But 'submitting' it first, and giving it a clear 'summary' of course are the first steps to resolve this. Regards, -- - Cor - http://nl.libreoffice.org ___ 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
Hi, On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 11:08:03AM +0100, Sophie Gautier wrote: For Checkbox we are waiting for an experienced/skilled QA member to write the tests, will we have this person for the call? I hope both Nicholas Skaggs and Yifan Jiang will be able to join the call so that we can work out what is doable, I assume that to be a lot easier to figure out in a call than via mail. Concerning Litmus, not sure it's necessary to sync it finally because I don't see it's usage enhanced. It's not really adapted to our needs and we should first think at the people who will use it instead of losing time writing tests that nobody will run. May be it would be interesting that our QA member working on Checkbox with Canonical work also on Case conductor to see how it feet our needs and/or how we can adapt it with the help of the language communities. Ok, let me rephrase the agena point to 'make it easy for Canonical (or other downstreams) to easily include our upstream tests in downstream infrastructure so that we can use that userbase for our tests too'. The technologies (litmus, case conductor, checkbox) are not set in stone and we should use whatever fits our needs best. Better? Cor will be available for the community things, so not sure I'll have to be there. Well, esp. for community and communications we should have as many as possible there to keep ways short. 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC
Hi Nino, On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 08:42:10AM +0100, Nino Novak wrote: 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. Noted. We will discuss that on the call. Keep in mind, that I myself know very little about the systems (litmus, case conductor, checkbox) involved and their abilities. I hope to learn more about them on the call. 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. Go ahead and organize! Dont ask for permission to get started, just do and see what works. Although there are quite a lot germans on the project our workload and email load does not allow us to also keep a close eye on localized mailing lists. So: So dont ask to ask -- just do it(*)! ;) 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 ;-) . 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. Somebody championing that (like Cor did for the BHS) would be great. It is likely to late for the 3.5 series, but if this is getting started now, it might easily be well prepared for 3.6. Are you interested in contributing to this? Best, Bjoern (*) The same applies to other local communities, of course. Spread the word! ___ 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
On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 09:55:10AM +0100, Cor Nouws wrote: I have some explicit ideas on some of the items. Should we attempt to exchange those before the meeting, or at least mention them (briefly)? In general, just mention a new topic as a oneliner to add to the agenda. If its something specific and detailed I would propose to add the text to the wiki add add the link to the agenda. Feel free to do so so for this call, although I fear with this being a first call we already have more than enough as-is, so dont be angry, if things get postponed to a later call. Obviously QA work is not the same as development work, and maybe people also (partly) step in from a different perspective. Thus a one-to-one copy of the approach, that is so successful at the developer side, will not do. gentoo and debian are just two successful example projects that are volunteer-only and do not do too much core development themselves -- indeed they do mostly release engineering and QA. And of course, we will simply copy LibreOffice development. As the examples show, QA can be volunteer-based and self-sustained -- independant of development. 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC
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
Hi, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote (07-03-12 13:04) On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 09:55:10AM +0100, Cor Nouws wrote: I have some explicit ideas on some of the items. Should we attempt to exchange those before the meeting, or at least mention them (briefly)? In general, just mention a new topic as a oneliner to add to the agenda. If its something specific and detailed I would propose to add the text to the wiki add add the link to the agenda. Feel free to do so so for this call, although I fear with this being a first call we already have more than enough as-is, so dont be angry, if things get postponed to a later call. I understand the scope and possibilities of the meeting. Will try to add some notes before - if I think it makes sense for the moment. Obviously QA work is not the same as development work, and maybe people also (partly) step in from a different perspective. Thus a one-to-one copy of the approach, that is so successful at the developer side, will not do. gentoo and debian are just two successful example projects that are volunteer-only and do not do too much core development themselves -- indeed they do mostly release engineering and QA. And of course, we will simply copy LibreOffice development. As the examples show, QA can be volunteer-based and self-sustained -- independant of development. IMO the question is not so much whether it should be volunteer-based or not, but rather how to reach a situation where the QA work is reasonable in balance with development - and preferable in the not to far future.. So, good to read that the Gentoo Debian people did it. Is known how they managed, or was it just there right from the beginning :-) ? Regards, -- - Cor - http://nl.libreoffice.org ___ 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] LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC
Hi all, I would like to set up a LibreOffice QA call to streamline our QA efforts. I propose to make our first call on: Friday, 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC I hope to repeat this call biweekly to discuss and coordinate ongoing QA issues, it would be great to have QA-contributors for the topics below able to join this call. prototype agenda for the first call: structured manual testing: - oneshot populating Ubuntu checkbox for LibreOffice 3.5? (Nicholas Skaggs) - syncing checkbox from litmus for LibreOffice 3.6 (Yifan Jiang) upstream bugwrangling: - 1000 NEEDINFO bugs, what can we do about it? (Rainer Bielefeld, Cor Nouws) - general bug stats (Rainer Bielefeld) - submarine bugs (aka important bugs that stay undiscovered too long) (Cor Nouws) distro bugwrangling: - upstreaming criteria/customs (Christopher M. Penalver, Petr Mladek, Caolan NcNamara, Rene Engelhard, Jan Holesovsky) community testing, communication: - how do we recruit more QA-interested contributors? (Cor Nouws, Sophie Gaultier) - can we have QA-related EasyHacks? Can we explicitly promote those? (all) regression testing/bibisect: - how do we broaden the bibisect know-how (Korrawit Pruegsanusak, Bjoern Michaelsen) - currently 27/27 bibisected bugs are older than the bibisect-range: - do we maybe need a bibisect for 3.4? - might indicate trouble during the bigmerge - bibisect bugzilla etiquette unittests/automated testing: (Markus Mohrhard) - overview of what we have - can we get non-developers into this, is there a way for non-C++ coders to get involved? Although I know not everyone proposed might be able to join the call, I would be happy if you try. If there are additional issues needing to be discussed, please reply to this mail with your addition. I will post the phone conference numbers later. 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/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice QA call 2012-03-09 15:00 UTC
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/
