Xubuntu-testing team status

[Stéphane Graber]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jim Campbell wrote:
> Thanks for your reply, Stéphane.  Please see my notes below.
> 
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 2:43 PM, Stéphane Graber <stgraber at ubuntu.com
> <mailto:stgraber at ubuntu.com>> wrote:
> 
>     -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>     Hash: SHA1
> 
> 
> 
>     Hi Jim,
> 
>     I personally don't think that it's of any use to have one testing team
>     for each derivatives and I think we are a lot more efficient working all
>     together sharing the testcases near release time. So I'm all for getting
>     rid of xubuntu-testing and moving those users to another team.
> 
>     Now comes the question of what team is best, I'd personally suggest the
>     current members of xubuntu-testing to move to ubuntu-testing.
>     ubuntu-testing contains everyone interested in testing Ubuntu, it's sort
>     of the equivalent of the ubuntu-bugsquad for package and distribution
>     testing.
> 
> 
> That makes sense to me.  The concern that I have with moving
> xubuntu-testers of to ubuntu-testers is that people will join
> ubuntu-testers to test ubuntu, and xubuntu wouldn't get the testing love
> that it needs.  Is there any intention of designating (or would it be
> possible to designate) some sort xubuntu-testing lead within the larger
> framework of the ubuntu-testing community?  And to have some designated
> xubuntu testers within that framework?
> 
> 
>     ubuntu-qa is more for people with experience and having done significant
>     contribution to Ubuntu QA. I would prefer to see Xubuntu testers first
>     join ubuntu-testing and then when they feel they contributed enough to
>     Ubuntu's QA effort, email this list and ask for ubuntu-qa membership.
> 
> 
> Understood.
>  
> 
> 
>     Improving the way we handle ISO testing approaching release time is
>     something we'll need to do in the very short future as it's proven to be
>     not enough efficient in the past (Intrepid's alphas are good example,
>     Hardy final too). I hope we'll work on that soon.
> 
> 
> Yes, that's why I think it would be better to have one coordinated team
> focusing on all of three sponsored distros, rather than several
> disparate teams all trying to play catch-up with the QA efforts that are
> happening for ubuntu. 
>  
> Thanks, and feel free to let me know your thoughts,
> 
> Jim
> 

Now that we have an "official" QA team, I'd suggest that our next step
is to improve our testing team.
We should have a clear structure on how we are managing testing for each
derivatives, how to contact when a bug is found approaching release time
(release managers for each derivatives).

The Ubuntu testing team should from my point of view remain an open team
as is the bugsquad but we should find a way of making it more active. I
just had a quick look at the member list and I hardly count 20 people
that I know have contributed to Ubuntu ISO testing or even joined the
#ubuntu-testing IRC channel.

That clearly needs fixing, now we need ideas on how to achieve that :)
Updating the team description on LP would be a good starting point, it
currently links to a non-existent wiki page so creating that wikipage
would also makes sense. Then we should maybe update the expiration time
of the members so we soon have an idea of who's active and who isn't.

Stéphane
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIgKc+jxyfqkjBhuwRAkCgAKCJxqxYeN2Tb69l9erIJ3Lwmv3/pwCfaOzF
3/uCq1cO1eLpHdM/lyskOMg=
=nBIh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----