FAQ
Hi,

just since a few people have been wondering about pear-qa and my
proposal for a qa-core team.

It seems that interest in qa is slowly pickung up.
However at the moment I would say we wouldnt really benefit by creating
a formal qa-core team. For now the pear group will be able to handle the
cases where packages need to be removed. Once we are a more settled in
bunch of productive QA people we can revisit the topic and maybe then we
have the necessary resources to do something like Jon suggested.

So in the sense for now I am suggesting to keep things as is in terms of
how we can do things (submit bug reports, test releases, post patches,
poke developers).

regards,
Lukas Smith
smith@backendmedia.com
_______________________________
BackendMedia
www.backendmedia.com
berlin@backendmedia.com

Linn Zwoch Smith GbR
Pariser Str. 44
D-10707 Berlin

Tel +49 30 83 22 50 00
Fax +49 30 83 22 50 07

Search Discussions

  • Stefan Neufeind at Feb 24, 2004 at 6:40 pm

    On 24 Feb 2004 at 17:21, Lukas Smith wrote:

    just since a few people have been wondering about pear-qa and my
    proposal for a qa-core team.

    It seems that interest in qa is slowly pickung up.
    However at the moment I would say we wouldnt really benefit by
    creating a formal qa-core team. For now the pear group will be able to
    handle the cases where packages need to be removed. Once we are a more
    settled in bunch of productive QA people we can revisit the topic and
    maybe then we have the necessary resources to do something like Jon
    suggested.

    So in the sense for now I am suggesting to keep things as is in terms
    of how we can do things (submit bug reports, test releases, post
    patches, poke developers).
    Agreed from my side, generally. But to be able to tel devs "please
    improve this or that" is sometimes easier with the pear-qa-sticker on
    it :-)

    As you stated: Sometimes "poking" helps a lot ... invested some time
    in directly contacting various authors the last week - and all that
    responded yet were quite happy for the help/reminder/anything they
    get as a new input from our QA-work. So PEARs, for now I'd say were
    doing a good (although still improvable) job.


    Keep up the good work. Regards,
    Stefan
  • Tobias Schlitt at Feb 24, 2004 at 6:50 pm

    Lukas Smith wrote:

    Hi,

    just since a few people have been wondering about pear-qa and my
    proposal for a qa-core team.

    It seems that interest in qa is slowly pickung up.
    However at the moment I would say we wouldnt really benefit by
    creating a formal qa-core team. For now the pear group will be able to
    handle the cases where packages need to be removed. Once we are a more
    settled in bunch of productive QA people we can revisit the topic and
    maybe then we have the necessary resources to do something like Jon
    suggested.
    Hi Lukas!

    Sorry, to say, but I see this point a bit different. No matter, that the
    pear-core group can (and should even later) handle heavy issues as
    package deletion (IIRC we agreed to mark depercated instead...?), the
    core group should create and regulate the QA process, IMHO. What we
    currently first need is a concrete definition about what QA should do
    for PEAR how this happens and which actions normal QA should perform.
    Therefor a hand of people is asked to set up such processes and
    harmonize them with the core group.

    Anyway. Since you're right, that we are quite few people caring for QA
    this can be done in cooperation of us all, but a clearly defined and
    announced group is more confidential and .
    So in the sense for now I am suggesting to keep things as is in terms
    of how we can do things (submit bug reports, test releases, post
    patches, poke developers).
    Ok, agreed here. We should go on with that all to make people talk about
    QA. :) WAKE UP EVERYONE! PEAR GETS QUALITY! :)

    Kind regards,
    Toby
    --

    Tobias Schlitt
    a passion for php http://www.schlitt.info
  • Jon Parise at Feb 24, 2004 at 9:31 pm

    On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 07:49:04PM +0100, Tobias Schlitt wrote:

    Sorry, to say, but I see this point a bit different. No matter, that the
    pear-core group can (and should even later) handle heavy issues as
    package deletion (IIRC we agreed to mark depercated instead...?), the
    core group should create and regulate the QA process, IMHO. What we
    currently first need is a concrete definition about what QA should do
    for PEAR how this happens and which actions normal QA should perform.
    Therefor a hand of people is asked to set up such processes and
    harmonize them with the core group.

    Anyway. Since you're right, that we are quite few people caring for QA
    this can be done in cooperation of us all, but a clearly defined and
    announced group is more confidential and .
    Let the QA effort develop organically for now. If there's a need for
    formalized beaurocracy, we can establish that later.

    --
    Jon Parise (jon@php.net) :: The PHP Project (http://www.php.net/)
  • Pierre-Alain Joye at Feb 25, 2004 at 5:19 pm

    On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 16:31:22 -0500 Jon Parise wrote:

    Let the QA effort develop organically for now. If there's a need for
    formalized beaurocracy, we can establish that later.
    I agree.

    pierre

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
grouppear-qa @
categoriesphp
postedFeb 24, '04 at 4:23p
activeFeb 25, '04 at 5:19p
posts5
users5
websitepear.php.net

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase