On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 10:15 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 2014-02-03 at 22:07 +0100, drago01 wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 9:55 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" >> <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > >> > On 02/03/2014 08:55 PM, drago01 wrote: >> >>> >> >>> >The WG's dont dictate or decide how we in QA spend our time. >> >> >> >> Where did I say that? Where did QA decide that they now longer want to >> >> test desktops? >> >> You seem to always talk about the whole QA community while in fact you >> >> are talking about yourself. >> > >> > >> > I suggest you check meeting logs [...] >> >> Only references I found where: >> "jreznik from Base WG would like to arrange a meeting with other teams >> members to discuss the future processes" and >> "Project-wide, planning is blocking on Fedora.next until the WGs >> report to FESCo in January; this makes QA planning for Fedora 21 >> mostly impossible until then" >> >> (Clicked through the summarys back to end of sep. 2013 ...) > > There is certainly a resource question for QA: it's generally reasonable > to guess that the Products will want to define a minimum expected level > of quality and that the project as a whole will want the primary > products (that wording is a hedge against the possibility that we wind > up defining lots more Products - right now I'm assuming the three > currently-defined Products are 'primary' ones) to meet their minimum > requirements for a Fedora release to ship. > > Right now we have fairly minimal requirements for the desktop and KDE > spins, and almost nothing for server or 'cloud' areas of the project, so > it's reasonable to assume the overall testing workload in a .next > universe will be higher than it is right now, and Johann is right to say > that, right now, 'QA' struggles to perform all the work that's > *currently* required. > > So this certainly is an area of concern that will likely need to be > looked at and resolved. Johann is of the opinion that the way to do this > is for QA to test the base system and leave everything above that to the > products, but we have not decided anything like that yet: as the summary > note above says, we really can't plan much until the .next / Product > proposals take more concrete form. Especially, we need to know what the > Products think their minimum quality requirements will be, obviously. Thanks. -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
