ubuntu-phone team mailing list archive

[Łukasz 'sil2100' Zemczak <lukasz.zemczak@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hey,

So regarding the first thing mentioned. We think that multiple testers
and devices can be introduced. So we think things like this are
acceptable, for instance:

Yes (#34 krillin sil2100,ogra)
or
Yes (#34 krillin,mako sil2100)
or
Yes (#34 krillin sil2100) (#233 mako ogra)
- in case 2 different people tested on 2 different devices.

As for the second one - it seems fine. As mentioned by Julien anything
for this is fine as long as it's easy to access and visible.

Cheers!

W dniu 12.09.2014 o 20:23, Julien Funk pisze:
> As long as the information is easy to attend, it should be fine no?
> 
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Tony Espy <espy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> On 09/12/2014 01:07 PM, Łukasz 'sil2100' Zemczak wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone!
>>>
>>> IMPORTANT! All landers please read on!
>>>
>>> So, as discussed with QA, we have new requirements regarding what
>>> information needs to be provided whenever a silo gets marked as tested
>>> by a lander. These new rules will allow QA engineers to have a better
>>> understanding how the testing has proceeded and who to contact when in
>>> any doubts.
>>>
>>> We are making some small changes to the information provided about silo
>>> testing to make the sign off process smoother and avoid confusion.
>>> First, you need to add two small details - the name of the tester and
>>> the device used for testing.
>>>
>>
>> In many cases, we have multiple testers and devices involved, so this
>> might be "names" of the testers and "devices" ( w/image #s of course ).
>>
>>  Second, it is recommended that you add comments on the testing that was
>>> done for your silo in the 'Test plans' field. Note that if you just list
>>> a test plan without further comment it will be assumed that *every* test
>>> in the test plan was run and passed - so please use the field as an
>>> opportunity to note any tests that were not run for whatever reason, or
>>> failed because of an existing bug.
>>>
>>
>> How 'bout a short summary in the 'Test Plans' field with maybe a link
>> and/or reference to a more detailed testing summary?
>>
>> Ex.
>>
>> For test results see: merge proposals x,y, and z.
>>
>> For a more concrete example, see:
>>
>> https://code.launchpad.net/~phablet-team/ofono/lp1363413/+merge/233434
>>
>> Trying to jam such details into a spreadsheet column feels a bit cramped...
>>
>> Regards,
>> /tony
>>
>>
>>> So, in short, when a silo has been tested by a lander, please switch the
>>> 'Testing pass?' field to:
>>> Yes (#<image number> <device> <tester>)
>>> e.g.
>>> Yes (#33 krillin sil2100)
>>>
>>> Please note that QA will not perform *any* QA sign-off for silos that do
>>> not follow the new recommendations. So we kindly ask all landers to
>>> apply these new rules ASAP.
>>>
>>> Thank you!
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone
>> Post to     : ubuntu-phone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
> 


-- 
Łukasz 'sil2100' Zemczak
 lukasz.zemczak@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 www.canonical.com