Re: [tdf-discuss] QA Infrastructure

Hello,

On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Friedrich Strohmaier <
damokles4-listen@bits-fritz.de> wrote:

> Hi Thorsten, *,
>
> Thorsten Behrens schrieb:
>
> > as we start to ramp up more infrastructure, I'd like to make
> > you think about what's crucially needed to do QA for LibreOffice
> > 3.3.
>
> > First of all, this is what we currently have:
>
> <stretched>
>
> > * a LibreOffice technical list (I'd like to have devs & QA
> >   discussion there):
>
> So do I, but I'd suggest to put the patch conversation on a different
> list - sort of patches@libreoffice.org.
>
> > * a bugtracker - bugs.freedesktop.org for the while (use
>
> > * a wiki (well, soon ;))
+1


> > * the testtool (similar to OpenOffice.org)
>
> </stretched>
>
> +1
Do you mean VCLTestool - used for automated testing in LibO?

Do we need a (VCLTesttool-used) test server? and
Do we need a build server like Java Huson?

That would be a big help (for QA members)


> > I'd prefer if we do the 3.3 release in a somewhat lightweight
> > fashion, and add tools as we go (and decide that we need them)
>
> +1
+1


> > I know that the OpenOffice.org QA project has things like QATrack,
> > QUASTe, and TCM - but I wonder which of those pass the test of "we
> > really need it, and it's worth the effort to duplicate it/set it up".
>
> > What do you think?
>
> I'll put here a short draft of my dreams if I think of an efficient QA
> :o))
>
> I think of three states the software idally should pass:
>
> 1. The most recent developer build (nightly builds).
The build takes days, so I would like weekly buids.


> 2. an "alive" release lets call it "LibO - fresh" which passed a quite
>   short beta period for early adopters, experienced users, and "new
>   features greedy" ones.
I thought our developers would work on git/svn branches so we have lots of
builds
(like that way Linux kernel hackers do)

All the branches can combined as a "fresh" realease (.i.e. unstable)
Combined works on the branches those are targeted for official releases,
we will have RC1, RC2... versions.

This staging strategy will improve the quality of LibO - I hope.


> 3. a "mature" release which has passed ~6 months "fresh" state.
>
> Question: How do us determine LibO's realease cycle.
I want it to be as short as possible (6 months?)


--
Best Regards,
Nguyen Hung Vu [aka: NVH] ( in Vietnamese: Nguyễn Vũ Hưng
 )
vuhung16plus{remove}@gmail.dot.com
<vuhung16plus%7Bremove%7D@gmail.dot.com>, YIM: vuhung16 , Skype:
vuhung16plus
A brief profile: http://www.hn.is.uec.ac.jp/~vuhung/Nguyen.Vu.Hung.html

--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscribe@documentfoundation.org
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/