Changes to review policy
axel.grude at gmail.com
Thu Apr 28 13:08:47 UTC 2016
> *Subject:*Re: Changes to review policy
> *To:*Axel Grude; Tb-planning
> *Sent: *Thursday, 28/04/2016 12:11:38 12:11 GMT ST +0100 [Week 17]
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016, at 10:45 AM, Axel Grude wrote:
>> Would it be possible to recruit some people for voluntary UAT - this means a more
>> focused effort than just relying on beta users to report. It would mean working
>> with the new features for a period of time (e.g. 2 weeks) within test cases created
>> by the patch author and then gathering the results and reporting them back to the
>> patch owner; either directly or via Bugzilla comment. Also a link to a compiled UAT
>> build would have to be available.
>> I would volunteer for being a UAT tester, if it wouldn't include code review or
>> having to compile my own version.
> It would be great to get more eyes on new features. Daily builds and beta builds are
> available for testing, you don't have to compile your own version. Beta testers with
> ideas for how to improve new features should not hesitate to file bugs.
> There was a request for feedback on this feature (and how it should be enabled) on
> tb-planning a year ago:
imho the beta process is a little to oblique and non-directional for specific UAT
testing; it would be great if there was a mailing list or something that patch writers
could use to release a list of "must be tested by UAT because fundamental customer
facing change" or something. As much as I love bugzilla and the fb+ feature I don't
think it is necessarily the primary tool for choice for a UAT user group; it is hard
to find the relevant bugs so often times it is just pure chance; I was testing the
beta on and off but only found out about the correspondence feature on the Friday when
the new release was mentioned.
Any way it could UAT be integrated into a more streamlined / focused work flow?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the tb-planning