lubuntu-qa team mailing list archive

[Phill Whiteside <PhillW@xxxxxxxxxx>]

As always,

wise words..

Regards,

Phill.


On 4 January 2014 20:38, Elfy <ub.untu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>  On 04/01/14 20:01, Javier Lopez wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Happy new year to all QA ubuntu members =). Since some time ago, launchpad has
> been used to track the progress on manual|automatic tests for Ubuntu and derived
> flavours (kubuntu, lubuntu, xubuntu, etc).
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-manual-testshttps://launchpad.net/ubuntu-autopilot-tests/
>
> Recently however, Paul White has pointed out that some of the flavours use
> other mediums to track progress on this aspect, eg. Kubuntu useshttps://trello.com/kubuntu.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-manual-tests/+bug/1183934
>
> Should keep using launchpad to track manual|automatic test for ubuntu derived
> flavours?
>
> Greetings
>
>
>  Happy new year to you too :)
>
> My position is simple enough.
>
> *Manual Testing.*
>
> If a flavour team wants to use the trackers then they should.
>
> If I'd seen this discussion before the bugs for manual testcases were
> created, I would at that point have been -1 to a mass creation of testcases
> for flavours without any discussion with them.
>
> It should be up to a team how to deal with their QA infrastructure.
>
> Different teams have differing resources - I'm positive that the only way
> that we (Xubuntu) managed to get the testcases we did written, onto the
> package tracker and actually tested was down to a lot of work by a very few
> people at the beginning.
>
> It was of some concern to find ~50 bugs all tagged Xubuntu - I didn't see
> any discussion on any mailing list about this.
>
> Now that we have the testcases - the tracker itself mostly looks after
> itself. Though actually getting tests done and reported is a different
> story.
>
> As far as Kubuntu goes - if they aren't using, and seem to have no
> inclination to do so - why shouldn't the Kubuntu testcase bugs be marked as
> invalid - as they surely are that ;) [1]
>
> I see that ubuntu-studio has 53 outstanding testcase bugs - they have less
> people than we do.
>
> Edubuntu has 65 of them - though I've no idea how many people there are
> available to do their testcases.
>
> *Autopilot testing*
>
> I can see the value in there being testcase bugs raised here - once the
> testcase is done then the need for people to get involved reduces
> remarkably - I assume.
>
> I'm surprised to be honest that there isn't a massive list of these.
> Perhaps because it  would seem that autopilot was set up purely for Ubuntu
> - which is understandable - we are having massive problems even getting
> anything to run for us in our environment, it would certainly have been of
> enormous help for us to have automatic testing - it is looking increasingly
> likely that we'll not ever be in a position to really take advantage of
> this.
>
>
> *Summary*
>
> In summary - it seems to me that we're looking at discussing something now
> that should have been discussed earlier.
>
> But the main thing we should look at is whether a flavour has any
> intention of using the package tracker. If QA as a team hasn't touched base
> with them - then perhaps we should be.
>
>
>
> Apologies if I did miss mailings.
>
> regards
>
> Elfy
>
>
> [1]
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kubuntu-devel/2014-January/007653.html
>
>
>
>
> --
> Ubuntu Forum Council Member
> Xubuntu QA Lead
>
>
> --
> Ubuntu-quality mailing list
> Ubuntu-quality@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
>
>


-- 
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/phillw