On Mon, 14 Jan 2013 12:24:12 +0000, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: > Which is another point this only collects what got written in the wiki > not what's reported in Bugzilla which excludes a largest group of our > reporters and some of our reporters might also be writing QA related > wiki pages and doing another QA related work. Dont those indviduals > deserve credit as well? There is a disclaimer at the bottom of kparal's blog post, at least. And the page is written carefully enough to not give credit to the "Top 10" only. Has anyone ever before retrieved and refined statistics from bugzilla? > The wiki was only supposed to be a a short term solution because we > never found a testing system to that quite suited our needs. It demands special efforts of the people who act in that area. In similar ways, Fedora Packaging requires special efforts of people who do packages. Hurdles everywhere. ;) I once had a look at what it would take to contribute "an official" test of Fedora Test Release media (e.g. my pet peeve scenario "DVD image on HDD"), but the Wiki pages were like a maze, very brief or for insiders only, new images were thrown out quickly (with no rsync access), with hardly any activity on test-list but probably heavy activity only on IRC. As I wrote, not everyone's cup of tea. If community people take the time to become familiar with all that, that's great. -- Fedora release 18 (Spherical Cow) - Linux 3.7.1-5.fc18.x86_64 loadavg: 0.02 0.22 0.18 -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
