You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Regina Henschel <rb...@t-online.de> on 2012/07/10 01:21:00 UTC

[QA] Workflow for Issues

Hi all,

in times with CWS and EIS there was a description of Issues lifecyle, 
http://www.openoffice.org/qa/ooQAReloaded/Docs/QA-Reloaded-IssueHandlingOverview.html. 
Some parts are lost and others totally outdated.

But I think, that such an information is useful and start a draft in 
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:Regina/MYDrafts4

Do you agree to provide such information?

If yes, where to put it?

If yes, please improve the text.

Kind regards
Regina

Re: [QA] Workflow for Issues

Posted by "O.Felka" <ol...@gmx.de>.

Am 10.07.2012 14:29, schrieb Regina Henschel:
> Hi all,
>
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Issue_lifecycle
>
> exist now. It is a Wiki, so feel free to edit it and improve it.
>

I think that "Make sure it is a valid issue" [1] is not a QA job only. 
DEV is involved also and should be in future.

Groetjes,
Olaf


[1]
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Issue_lifecycle#Make_sure_it_is_a_valid_issue_.28QA.29

Re: [QA] Workflow for Issues

Posted by Regina Henschel <rb...@t-online.de>.

Hi all,

http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Issue_lifecycle

exist now. It is a Wiki, so feel free to edit it and improve it.

Zhe Liu schrieb:
> 2012/7/10 Regina Henschel <rb...@t-online.de>:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> in times with CWS and EIS there was a description of Issues lifecyle,
>> http://www.openoffice.org/qa/ooQAReloaded/Docs/QA-Reloaded-IssueHandlingOverview.html.
>> Some parts are lost and others totally outdated.
>>
>> But I think, that such an information is useful and start a draft in
>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:Regina/MYDrafts4
>>
>> Do you agree to provide such information?
>>
>> If yes, where to put it?
> IMHO, wiki is OK. Move your page to a form address, e.g.
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/issue_lifecycle.

Done.

  Later, we
> can add an entry to http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/qa.html

I'm not sure, whether that should exist at all. I think, that it is not 
a good idea to have the information scattered. There is already a portal 
page http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Quality_Assurance. 
Wouldn't it be better to handle the whole website content of the old QA 
project as legacy, as museum, and try to refresh, correct and complete 
the Wiki content?

Kind regards
Regina

Re: [QA] Workflow for Issues

Posted by Zhe Liu <al...@gmail.com>.

2012/7/10 Regina Henschel <rb...@t-online.de>:
> Hi all,
>
> in times with CWS and EIS there was a description of Issues lifecyle,
> http://www.openoffice.org/qa/ooQAReloaded/Docs/QA-Reloaded-IssueHandlingOverview.html.
> Some parts are lost and others totally outdated.
>
> But I think, that such an information is useful and start a draft in
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:Regina/MYDrafts4
>
> Do you agree to provide such information?
>
> If yes, where to put it?
IMHO, wiki is OK. Move your page to a form address, e.g.
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/issue_lifecycle. Later, we
can add an entry to http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/qa.html

>
> If yes, please improve the text.
>
> Kind regards
> Regina



-- 
Best Regards
>From aliuzhe@gmail.com

Re: [QA] Workflow for Issues

Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.

Hi,

On 10.07.2012 14:42, Regina Henschel wrote:
> Hi Oliver,
>
> Oliver-Rainer Wittmann schrieb:
>> Hi Regina,
>>
>> On 10.07.2012 01:21, Regina Henschel wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> in times with CWS and EIS there was a description of Issues lifecyle,
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/qa/ooQAReloaded/Docs/QA-Reloaded-IssueHandlingOverview.html.
>>>
>>>
>>> Some parts are lost and others totally outdated.
>>>
>>> But I think, that such an information is useful and start a draft in
>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:Regina/MYDrafts4
>>>
>>> Do you agree to provide such information?
>>>
>>> If yes, where to put it?
>>>
>>> If yes, please improve the text.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for your work - the new information looks good.
>>
>> One minor remark:
>> May be we can use status "VERIFIED" for a two step verification:
>> First step, verification on a dev. snapshot or on built version or ...
>> --> change status to "VERIFIED".
>> Second step, verification on a release candidate --> closing issue.
>> It is just an idea for discussion.
>> The two step verification would decrease the possibility that a
>> sucessful made fix may be got lost by another change before the next
>> release is coming out.
>
> We had this two step verification before and end up in a lot of verified but not
> closed issues. Which in the end lead to a large campaign to close all those
> issues. Such two step verification would need an automatic "reminder". I do not
> know, whether it is possible in Bugzilla or how it can be organized in other ways.
>

Ah, yes I am remembering now this "campaign".
Thus, my idea would only work, if we have volunteers to work on the second step.
If we want such a two-step verification we could have a release blocker issue 
for it - "assure that all issues fixed and verified for this version are closed 
- Bugzilla query X have to be empty."


Best regards, Oliver.

Re: [QA] Workflow for Issues

Posted by "O.Felka" <ol...@gmx.de>.

Regina,

thank you for your good work.

>> One minor remark:
>> May be we can use status "VERIFIED" for a two step verification:
>> First step, verification on a dev. snapshot or on built version or ...
>> --> change status to "VERIFIED".
>> Second step, verification on a release candidate --> closing issue.
>> It is just an idea for discussion.
>> The two step verification would decrease the possibility that a
>> sucessful made fix may be got lost by another change before the next
>> release is coming out.
>
> We had this two step verification before and end up in a lot of verified
> but not closed issues. Which in the end lead to a large campaign to
> close all those issues. Such two step verification would need an
> automatic "reminder". I do not know, whether it is possible in Bugzilla
> or how it can be organized in other ways.

at least in OOo we haven't re-verified the issues in MWS. We've been 
confident in the release process that all CWSes that have been 
integrated bringing the fixes in the MWS.
We've waited for about six month after release and closed all verified 
issues for this release in one go.

If we have reached the state that we are confident that all fixes in dev 
will come to the master we can think about a process to close the issues 
without a second verification.

Groetjes,
Olaf

Re: [QA] Workflow for Issues

Posted by Regina Henschel <rb...@t-online.de>.

Hi Oliver,

Oliver-Rainer Wittmann schrieb:
> Hi Regina,
>
> On 10.07.2012 01:21, Regina Henschel wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> in times with CWS and EIS there was a description of Issues lifecyle,
>> http://www.openoffice.org/qa/ooQAReloaded/Docs/QA-Reloaded-IssueHandlingOverview.html.
>>
>> Some parts are lost and others totally outdated.
>>
>> But I think, that such an information is useful and start a draft in
>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:Regina/MYDrafts4
>>
>> Do you agree to provide such information?
>>
>> If yes, where to put it?
>>
>> If yes, please improve the text.
>>
>
> Thanks for your work - the new information looks good.
>
> One minor remark:
> May be we can use status "VERIFIED" for a two step verification:
> First step, verification on a dev. snapshot or on built version or ...
> --> change status to "VERIFIED".
> Second step, verification on a release candidate --> closing issue.
> It is just an idea for discussion.
> The two step verification would decrease the possibility that a
> sucessful made fix may be got lost by another change before the next
> release is coming out.

We had this two step verification before and end up in a lot of verified 
but not closed issues. Which in the end lead to a large campaign to 
close all those issues. Such two step verification would need an 
automatic "reminder". I do not know, whether it is possible in Bugzilla 
or how it can be organized in other ways.

Kind regards
Regina

Re: [QA] Workflow for Issues

Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.

Hi Regina,

On 10.07.2012 01:21, Regina Henschel wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> in times with CWS and EIS there was a description of Issues lifecyle,
> http://www.openoffice.org/qa/ooQAReloaded/Docs/QA-Reloaded-IssueHandlingOverview.html.
> Some parts are lost and others totally outdated.
>
> But I think, that such an information is useful and start a draft in
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:Regina/MYDrafts4
>
> Do you agree to provide such information?
>
> If yes, where to put it?
>
> If yes, please improve the text.
>

Thanks for your work - the new information looks good.

One minor remark:
May be we can use status "VERIFIED" for a two step verification:
First step, verification on a dev. snapshot or on built version or ... --> 
change status to "VERIFIED".
Second step, verification on a release candidate --> closing issue.
It is just an idea for discussion.
The two step verification would decrease the possibility that a sucessful made 
fix may be got lost by another change before the next release is coming out.

Best regards, Oliver.

Re: [QA] Workflow for Issues

Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.

Hi,

On 10.07.2012 03:51, Li Feng Wang wrote:
> Very useful to unify QA work,
>
> Suggest to add tag when file or verify defects, like
> [MemoryLeak]:Memory Leak defect, need verify via long time running.
> [Dev]: Open by developer, and may can't verify from user view.
> [Crash]: Crash defect
> [Regression]:Regression defect
> [Lost]:Defect about data lost .etc
>

marking/tagging issues correspondingly is very useful.

For above mentioned "Crash", "Regression" and "Lost" we already have the 
corresponding keywords "crash", "regression" and "data_lost".

I am not sure, but may be we should thought about having only one way to 
mark/tag issues.

Best regards, Oliver.

> 2012/7/10 Ji Yan <ya...@gmail.com>
>
>> 2012/7/10 Regina Henschel <rb...@t-online.de>
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> in times with CWS and EIS there was a description of Issues lifecyle,
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/qa/**ooQAReloaded/Docs/QA-Reloaded-**
>>> IssueHandlingOverview.html<
>> http://www.openoffice.org/qa/ooQAReloaded/Docs/QA-Reloaded-IssueHandlingOverview.html
>>> .
>>> Some parts are lost and others totally outdated.
>>>
>>> But I think, that such an information is useful and start a draft in
>>> http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/User:**Regina/MYDrafts4<
>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:Regina/MYDrafts4>
>>>
>>> Do you agree to provide such information?
>>>
>>> If yes, where to put it?
>>>
>>> If yes, please improve the text.
>>>
>>> Kind regards
>>> Regina
>>>
>>
>> Your document is very helpful. Looked in bugzilla guide I find Bugzilla has
>> issue life cycle definition [1], this diagram show the life cycle more
>> clearly
>> IMHO we should have more detail document to help user file bug, may I add
>> my thought on how to file bug in your page?
>>
>>
>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/docs/en/html/lifecycle.html
>> --
>>
>>
>> Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
>>
>
>
>

Re: [QA] Workflow for Issues

Posted by Li Feng Wang <ph...@gmail.com>.

Very useful to unify QA work,

Suggest to add tag when file or verify defects, like
[MemoryLeak]:Memory Leak defect, need verify via long time running.
[Dev]: Open by developer, and may can't verify from user view.
[Crash]: Crash defect
[Regression]:Regression defect
[Lost]:Defect about data lost .etc

2012/7/10 Ji Yan <ya...@gmail.com>

> 2012/7/10 Regina Henschel <rb...@t-online.de>
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > in times with CWS and EIS there was a description of Issues lifecyle,
> > http://www.openoffice.org/qa/**ooQAReloaded/Docs/QA-Reloaded-**
> > IssueHandlingOverview.html<
> http://www.openoffice.org/qa/ooQAReloaded/Docs/QA-Reloaded-IssueHandlingOverview.html
> >.
> > Some parts are lost and others totally outdated.
> >
> > But I think, that such an information is useful and start a draft in
> > http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/User:**Regina/MYDrafts4<
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:Regina/MYDrafts4>
> >
> > Do you agree to provide such information?
> >
> > If yes, where to put it?
> >
> > If yes, please improve the text.
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Regina
> >
>
> Your document is very helpful. Looked in bugzilla guide I find Bugzilla has
> issue life cycle definition [1], this diagram show the life cycle more
> clearly
> IMHO we should have more detail document to help user file bug, may I add
> my thought on how to file bug in your page?
>
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/docs/en/html/lifecycle.html
> --
>
>
> Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
>



-- 
Best Wishes, LiFeng Wang

Re: [QA] Workflow for Issues

Posted by Ji Yan <ya...@gmail.com>.

2012/7/10 Regina Henschel <rb...@t-online.de>

> Hi all,
>
> in times with CWS and EIS there was a description of Issues lifecyle,
> http://www.openoffice.org/qa/**ooQAReloaded/Docs/QA-Reloaded-**
> IssueHandlingOverview.html<http://www.openoffice.org/qa/ooQAReloaded/Docs/QA-Reloaded-IssueHandlingOverview.html>.
> Some parts are lost and others totally outdated.
>
> But I think, that such an information is useful and start a draft in
> http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/User:**Regina/MYDrafts4<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:Regina/MYDrafts4>
>
> Do you agree to provide such information?
>
> If yes, where to put it?
>
> If yes, please improve the text.
>
> Kind regards
> Regina
>

Your document is very helpful. Looked in bugzilla guide I find Bugzilla has
issue life cycle definition [1], this diagram show the life cycle more
clearly
IMHO we should have more detail document to help user file bug, may I add
my thought on how to file bug in your page?


[1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/docs/en/html/lifecycle.html
-- 


Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji