Summary of TB QA Meeting at Mozcamp
Wayne Mery (d531)
vseerror at Lehigh.EDU
Fri Sep 21 19:51:36 UTC 2012
On 9/11/2012 4:28 PM, Kent James wrote:
> On 9/11/2012 12:41 PM, Joshua Cranmer wrote:
>> On 9/11/2012 1:47 PM, Mike Conley wrote:
>>> *Action items*
>>> 1. Get a list of people watching each TB component, and make sure
>>> we've got somebody with eyes on each one.
>>> 2. We're going to tackle the Papercuts list (10 bugs) to prove that
>>> we can deal with a list.
>>> 3. rkent(?) is going to send out a weekly status report on the
>>> Papercuts list, and what needs fixing, on what got fixed.
>> I was under the impression that the weekly status report on The List
>> was going to be managed by QA / Support. It's also not clear who will
>> be receiving the status report on The List.
Which "The List" do you refer too? The papercuts list? Or the "most
important bugs" list, which we discussed at mozcamp and which is
different from papercuts? (I see the two lists as coexisting)
> Going forward, there is not going to be enough (paid) QA/support around
> to maintain The List.
> Looking backward, I don't think that QA/Support
> has felt sufficiently empowered to regularly bug developers to work on
> specific papercut issues.
Indeed - it is not been "our place" to make such decisions. Though we
can communicate our thoughts. Just has it has not been the case for users.
> A "developer lead" need to advocate for getting things on the list
> fixed. A "QA/support" lead needs to advocate to add things to the list.
> Since we agreed at the meeting that the issue in the past has been
> getting things fixed, I have volunteered (post TB-17) to serve as the
> "developer lead" in this narrow case to advocate for getting things fixed.
Yes, I think having someone on the dev end to categorize bugs and watch
the flow is going in the right direction. I think Mark has functioned in
this capacity in some ways.
More information about the tb-planning