On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 12:08 PM Lukas Ruzicka <lruzicka@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello, I have been doing the KDE "all applications must work" test for more than two years already and I cantell you, that some of the KDE pre-installed applications are of low quality, if not broken already. Last time I checked, there were over 60 applications listed in Menu where there are like 30 in Gnome. Some applications (browsers) are tripled, some are doubled. Others are connected with a certain use case, e.g. converting one data format into another, therefore useless for people without that use case.If "all applications" must work, than I need to start every application and test the "basic functionality". Nowhere is written exactly, what basic functionality is, so I must test what I think needs to be tested "in bona fide." Many KDE applications generally work, but they have flaws in some parts that can or do not need to be basic functionality, depending on opinions.In case of a reported bug, the readiness of KDE developers to fix it usually is lower when compared to Gnome, so sometimes there are bugs that will never be fixed, because they are not as severe as to block the release completely, so they get ship over and over again.The proposal could actually improve the situation, because important apps would be tested thoroughly and not just for the basic functionality.
Lukas described it all nicely, but in this particular place I have to clarify. The proposed criterion still requires just "basic functionality" of covered apps. If we can use some of the saved time to test those covered applications more thoroughly is a different question, and it's possible, but I don't want to promise anything. Another possible improvement is that we might be able to automate testing of some of those applications.
I want to make one additional point. I could have proposed that the criterion applied to all desktops. From QA point, it's less work for us, that should make us happy, right? But I didn't - because I'm trying to find some balance between our responsibilities and the end-user benefits. And it's a difficult balance to find. If we can't find it, that easy solution is always there. If you have opinions on where to draw the line and how to improve the situation in a different way, please tell us.
_______________________________________________ kde mailing list -- kde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to kde-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
