Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> On Fri, 2012-05-25 at 11:35 -0700, bfo wrote:
> > I read that you have unused reporting tool in the codebase and plans
> > to bring it back to life. Without it do you know the top crashers?
>       Not really; we rely on human bug filing and QA to bring these to our
> attention; of course, lots of users simply don't bother to file bugs,
> but hopefully we get some reports for these.
I think it won't do any good in the long term. Enabling reporting tool would
give you a chance to
get more data without the need to know the bugzilla magic by the users (just
opt in to send the reports). 
It could bring more testers to the project, as now you have to do an own
debug build to test LO 
with proper backtraces (especially on Windows).
Then (or I should write "Before that") you can think about what to do with
the data (and how). 
Luckily you can use experience of other projects (nice reading at
http://blog.mozilla.org/metrics/) 
or code even and work with dashboards like https://crash-stats.mozilla.com/ 
or http://brasstacks.mozilla.com/orangefactor for instance. 
I can see you have quite a few  http://tinderbox.libreoffice.org tinderboxes  
but the question is - how do you use them for QA? 
Browsing through QA articles I can feel it is more like - download, run,
test, report scheme atm.



>       Anyone is welcome to put / link them into whatever wiki page they
> like :-) if you want it - go for it ! I'm happy to add a link to it at
> the bottom of my template so it's easy to find in future.
Yea... As wiki.d.o can have 
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/BoD_Meetings TDF BoD meetings  or 
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Membership_Committee_Meetings
Membership Committee Meetings  
I simply do not understand why Engineering Steering Committee Meeting are
not there. 
It is very valuable information about what is going on in the project. 
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/RBd/TSC_Call_Minutes RBd 's notes are a
good read, 
but you know... pasting minutes into wiki template do not need another
volunteer...



> > Also I am really concerned about your QA priorities. IMHO you should
> > care little more about Windows builds and MS Office filters.
>       Who is the 'you' here ? you are one of us if you're helping out :-) 
> [...]
>       However, getting the best and fastest possible list of and
> prioritisation of bugs is a crucial task of QA 
By "you" I mean QA Team. Reading ESC minutes I do not see general rule of
prioritisation of bugs.
Is it 1. crashers 2. regressions 3. enhancements or any other scheme? I
can't feel it atm. 
You have MAB meta bugs, but it's more "my bug is more buggy than your bug"
attitude there.



> > Sadly I'm not QA specialist. I just decided to help LO project by
> > confirming as many bugs as I can find in Bugzilla. Hope this will help
> > increase the quality of LO for Windows in any way...
>       Certainly - it's a really good way to help out. 
Yes, I started doing that. It seems it moved things a little bit in few bugs
already.
Should I do something more? Maybe, but changing to NEW is quite complicated 
in your workflow, so mostly I leave them as UNCONFIRMED.
Best regards.
P.S.
Sorry for off-topic.

--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-3-5-3rc1-win32-debug-package-tp3984895p3987465.html
Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.