User:Grundleborg/BugSquad/BugDayPlanning/kdepim-krush-1: Difference between revisions
Grundleborg (talk | contribs) (IRC log from #kontact) |
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 15:03, 30 April 2008
[22:44] <grundleborg> winterz: we can get quite a lot of manpower, as long as coding skills aren't required [22:44] <winterz> +grundleborg: yes. I'd like to see a kdepim regression testing [22:44] <winterz> +grundleborg: basically, see what worked in 3.5.9 but doesn't in 4.x [22:45] <winterz> +grundleborg: and bug squashing would be nice too [22:45] <winterz> +grundleborg: we have a severe lack of bug reports for the devel version.. and I can't believe we are doing that well :) [22:45] <grundleborg> winterz: it sounds like you need something a bit more urgent than bugzilla triage at the moment though... but just regression testing sounds feasable [22:46] <winterz> +grundleborg: that would be great [22:46] <vkrause> +winterz: btw, if you are aware of critical bugs in primary applications, please let till, ervin, me or anyone else of kdab know, we need to fix those anyway [22:46] <winterz> +vkrause,grundleborg: we have a list of regressions on techbase. [22:46] <winterz> +that list needs to be updated [22:47] <grundleborg> winterz: ok, so the idea is to just get people to try and trigger bugs in the various apps, and then stick them in bugzilla against "SVN" version of the app? [22:48] <winterz> +the url is ...http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/PIM/KDE_4-related_bugs [22:48] <winterz> +grundleborg: yep. either that or maybe put them on the techbase page. sorta like we did for the kde4 krush days [22:49] <grundleborg> oh OK, that'll be much more efficient [22:49] <winterz> +yea, I like that idea [22:49] <grundleborg> winterz: if you have any tips/advice about how to do this kind of testing, it would be very useful :) [22:50] <winterz> +grundleborg: that's part of the problem. few people have access to a kolab or groupware resource. for example. [22:51] <vkrause> +winterz: the still open stuff on that lists doesn't look too critical to me, ie. not affecting the basic functionality in most cases, still anoying though, sure [22:52] <winterz> +gotta go for a bit. be back pretty soon [22:52] <grundleborg> winterz: we can probably schedule a day on this for 2.5 weeks time, does that sound OK?