On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 15:53 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > I don't really see any reason why *everyone* who's a packager shouldn't > > also have signed up to be a proven tester by now. I'd like to ask if > > anyone has a perception that it's a hard process to get involved in, or > > if they got the impression that they *shouldn't* get engaged in it, or > > something like that. Maybe we can improve the presentation to make it > > clear that this really ought to be a very wide-based process. > > > With that in mind, perhaps we should have being added to the packager group > automatically put you in the proventester group. If you turn out to be > a problem we can then remove you from the proventester group until you've > learned how you should be testing. (On the implementation side, we should > have this ability in fas since we do something similar to put people who > sign the cla into the cla_done group automatically). I'm not sure I'd want to go quite that far unless the sign-up process can wave the proven testers instructions in your face quite prominently. They're short and easy to read and understand, but you can't infer them from first principles: we do want to have people read the proven tester instructions before becoming proven testers. That's actually the *only* requirement to become a proven tester. :) > And in answer to your question -- my perception is that it's a separate > thing that I could join just as I've joined infrastructure as well as > packaging. So in the sense that it's not something that's automatically > there for me to do by virtue of being in packager, it is hard to get > involved in. Thanks. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
