On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 14:06 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 18:31 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > > On 06/21/2010 06:22 PM, TK009 wrote: > > > On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 13:44:47 -0400 > > > James Laska<jlaska@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > >> More food for thought ... > > >> > > >> I've heard thoughts from others about how the 'test day' name doesn't > > >> accurately match the effort. One suggestion was to rebrand the effort > > >> as 'bug day'. Similar to http://live.gnome.org/Bugsquad/BugDays > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> James > > >> > > > I have only participated in a few test days however test day(s) are > > > nothing like gnomes bug day from my experience so not a good name choice > > > imho. > > > > > > It was my hope that bugzappers triage day would be an event similar to > > > gnomes bug day but we (the bugzappers) have failed thus far to really > > > get that going. > > > > > > > Let's just call it Test sprint ;) > > Andre suggested 'Testathon' on IRC. Perhaps we can have a poll. =) > > It did make me have very rough thoughts about the possibility of doing a > sort of 'rebranding exercise' (excuse me for a second while I shoot > myself) around one of the newer names; change our conception of the > event itself a little bit as well as the name, and maybe provide a > longer time base for publicity. Ubuntu, for instance, has the old > marketing trick of announcing everything at least five times down pat; > we could do this with Test Sprints / Test Blitzes / Testathons / > whatever. Very rough sketch - > > * we can do a shiny announcement when we've decided what events we'll > have > * we can do a shiny announcement when the test cases for a given event > are done > * we can declare week-long Focus Periods for each event and do shiny > announcements at the start and end of each > * we can do three shiny announcements of the 'Blitz Day' or whatever > associated with each event; before, during, after (with the 'before' and > 'after' announcements emphasizing that you can test already/still) > * we can do a shiny wrap-up at the end of the cycle > > I dunno, it's just a thought. Very rough so far... Good thoughts. Another point is we'd better make the whole schedule in advance before the first test day, instead of proposing each test day one or two weeks before its held time like some ones in Fedora 13. This schedule can still be modified in case something happens, but generally a list of tested features with their held time should be planned before the test days period. This way, testers can get a whole view of them and have full time to prepare what they want to participate in. In addition, I don't think the name 'test day' is a big reason for reducing attendance... But if it is going to be changed, I hope it can also be applicable on release validation test and other test events in future, then a big schedule can be designed with all fedora test events using this name. Thanks, Hurry > -- > 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 -- Contacts Hurry FAS Name: Rhe Timezone: UTC+8 TEL: 86-010-62608141 IRC nick: rhe #fedora-qa #fedora-zh -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
