Get Involved/Quality/Akademy2012BoF: Difference between revisions
Appearance
< Get Involved | Quality
Initial Import from text |
No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
KDE Quality Team BOF | KDE Quality Team BOF | ||
==Review of 4.9 testing== | |||
* Was really only a trial, went well. | |||
* Definitely better than if we hadn't done anything | |||
* Regression email to Plasma worked well (though should probably stop now) | |||
* We need to scale up what we're doing into more areas, without doing a worse job on it | |||
Improving User Testing | ==Improving User Testing== | ||
* The checklists in Plasma worked well, found (and fixed) many issues. | |||
* This needs to be extended to everything | |||
* AG, Copy Ubuntu's "checkboxes" (TODO find a link) | |||
* It tells the user "do this [worked, broken, skip]" | |||
* Then submits a report | |||
* Don't be too specific in what to check, that way the user can spot bugs that are hard for automated testing to find. | |||
* Less work to write than automated tests, and more flexible. | |||
EBN | ==EBN== | ||
* too many false positives / minor issues hide the big issues | |||
* Aleix Poi apparently has a static analyser written for a thesis we could look at. | |||
Jenkins | ==Jenkins== | ||
* Needs to be more open | |||
* We need examples/docs. What it does + how to use it. | |||
Valgrind (memcheck) | ==Valgrind (memcheck)== | ||
* This is a useful test, however it's quite tricky to use/analyse, so reports should only be done by developers testing (to identify which lib a leak is in for example) | |||
* Someone should write a wiki page on how to memcheck, filter out nonsense that we can't fix. | |||
* Then submit leaks as bug reports with valgrind backtraces | |||
Improving Tester numbers | ==Improving Tester numbers== | ||
* RG to make VirtualBox images of ProjectNeon. Has some issues, hopefully can all be fixed before 4.10 | |||
Release numbers | ==Release numbers== | ||
* AG suggested modifying the release numbers to something more easier. | |||
** 4.9.71 = alpha1 | |||
** 4.9.72 = alpha2 | |||
** 4.9.73 = alpha3 | |||
** 4.9.81 = beta1 | |||
** 4.9.82 = beta2 | |||
** 4.9.91 = RC1 | |||
** 4.9.92 = RC2 | |||
* suggest changing for 4.10 | |||
Other | ==Other== | ||
* everyone should listen to Jeroen on bugzilla management. | |||
Extra Mile | ==Extra Mile== | ||
* [Insert Link to AG bof here] | |||
* Was agreed to put it under the banner of "KDE Quality" and do the discussions/planning on our mailing list/IRC channel. If you have any objections to that, please raise them now. | |||
Actions | ==Actions== | ||
* Write an email to the kde-release-team with the proposed release numbers | |||
* Write a tool for showing "UI test steps" | |||
* Write some test examples (suggest AG does gwenview, DE to do KTP, then we can encourage users to write tests for the others) | |||
* Sort out Jenkins | |||
* find a way to highlight the important issues in EBN | |||
* Tools page in wiki needs splitting into debuggers/profilers (such as gammaray) and actual testing tools |
Revision as of 11:01, 12 July 2012
KDE Quality Team BOF
Review of 4.9 testing
- Was really only a trial, went well.
- Definitely better than if we hadn't done anything
- Regression email to Plasma worked well (though should probably stop now)
- We need to scale up what we're doing into more areas, without doing a worse job on it
Improving User Testing
- The checklists in Plasma worked well, found (and fixed) many issues.
- This needs to be extended to everything
- AG, Copy Ubuntu's "checkboxes" (TODO find a link)
- It tells the user "do this [worked, broken, skip]"
- Then submits a report
- Don't be too specific in what to check, that way the user can spot bugs that are hard for automated testing to find.
- Less work to write than automated tests, and more flexible.
EBN
- too many false positives / minor issues hide the big issues
- Aleix Poi apparently has a static analyser written for a thesis we could look at.
Jenkins
- Needs to be more open
- We need examples/docs. What it does + how to use it.
Valgrind (memcheck)
- This is a useful test, however it's quite tricky to use/analyse, so reports should only be done by developers testing (to identify which lib a leak is in for example)
- Someone should write a wiki page on how to memcheck, filter out nonsense that we can't fix.
- Then submit leaks as bug reports with valgrind backtraces
Improving Tester numbers
- RG to make VirtualBox images of ProjectNeon. Has some issues, hopefully can all be fixed before 4.10
Release numbers
- AG suggested modifying the release numbers to something more easier.
- 4.9.71 = alpha1
- 4.9.72 = alpha2
- 4.9.73 = alpha3
- 4.9.81 = beta1
- 4.9.82 = beta2
- 4.9.91 = RC1
- 4.9.92 = RC2
- suggest changing for 4.10
Other
- everyone should listen to Jeroen on bugzilla management.
Extra Mile
- [Insert Link to AG bof here]
- Was agreed to put it under the banner of "KDE Quality" and do the discussions/planning on our mailing list/IRC channel. If you have any objections to that, please raise them now.
Actions
- Write an email to the kde-release-team with the proposed release numbers
- Write a tool for showing "UI test steps"
- Write some test examples (suggest AG does gwenview, DE to do KTP, then we can encourage users to write tests for the others)
- Sort out Jenkins
- find a way to highlight the important issues in EBN
- Tools page in wiki needs splitting into debuggers/profilers (such as gammaray) and actual testing tools