On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 23:05 -0500, Aaron Faanes wrote: > I worked on this draft a bit on my own user-page. Specifically, I > wikified some of the links and heavily edited the overview paragraph. > I'm not an expert by any means on the proven-testers proposal, so I > might have introduced inaccuracies. Here's the link: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Dafrito/Draft_proventesters_instructions#Testing_process I definitely think your version is an improvement on mine, thanks very much. I'd say let's consider this the current working draft for now. > I wonder if the article would read better by shaping the article > around responsibilities directly. Each responsibility might be a > separate section. Here's an example: > > Overview > Responsibilities > - Find & install updates to test (Explain updates-testing, Bodhi, > --enablerepo, etc.) > - Ensure minimum required functionality (Explain release criteria, > critpath actions) > - Investigate problematic updates (Explain techniques?) > - Report karma to Bodhi, and Bugzilla if necessary (Explain karma rules) This seems to be how you've done it in your current draft, and I like that. > On the other hand, if it seems like these responsibilities share a lot > of information, then the separate sections could instead become bullet > points under a 'Responsibilities' section. The shared infomration > would then become separate sections: > > Overview > Responsibilities > Getting Updates (ways to enable updates-testing) > Criteria > - release criteria > - critpath actions > Tools > - fedora-easy-karma > - bodhi > > This might be too article-centric. If the goal of the page is to > strictly define proven-testers, then a step-by-step outline makes more > sense. However, linear instructions imply strict adherence, and there > seems to be a lot of flexibility in how proven-testers can/should > work. > > I'd be happy to continue working on this by implementing one of the > outlines above on my draft, or by doing something entirely different, > too! I just figured I'd throw some ideas out before I got ahead of > myself. :) I'm pretty pleased with your current draft, but if you like the second one better, that's cool too. Or you could draft both and we could pick which we like. =) I think the 'Investigate & provide feedback' section could be streamlined a little - with your nicer framework, some of the content is duplicated or unnecessary and can be trimmed. Do you mind if I make some edits to achieve this? Thanks again! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
