On Tue, 2014-04-15 at 07:32 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 04/15/2014 04:03 AM, Mike Ruckman wrote: > > We're each going to be working with the WG's to help them draft their > > test plans for their products - in an attempt (AIUI) to keep consistent > > test plans throughout the whole Fedora.next ecosystem. Though I > > understand how that could read as we're just doing it in lieu of them > > doing it themselves... > > I'm not seeing any request from the WG neither here or on in our QA > tracker seeking that help so would be good to know where this originate > from? > > This probably should be kept under their WG space in the wiki and I > probably should start removing bits outside our release criteria that is > not related to the installer and core/baseOS somewhere else. Read the full meeting log for context. I'm suggesting an approach to the big Fedora.next questions. Phase 1 is we figure out the scope of what actually ought to get tested across all Products, in an ideal world. Phase 2 is where we figure out the details of how much of that testing we (Fedora) can actually get done, and how it should be split up between QA and the relevant WGs/SIGs/whatever. Seems hard to achieve Phase 2 without first having a quantification of Phase 1. You raise a good point as regards where these should be - I've just mentioned the server one at the Server WG meeting, and I plan to send my draft to both server@ and test@ lists for comment. It might indeed make sense to put the 'final' documents in the WG spaces rather than the QA spaces on the wiki. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
