[Koha-devel] Proposed QA Enhancements

[Chris Cormack]

* Paul Poulain (paul.poulain at biblibre.com) wrote:
> Le 21/05/2012 19:38, Chris Nighswonger a écrit :
> > http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Bug-enhancement-patch_Workflow#Steps
> > 
> > 1. I propose that we modify step 5 to read:
> > 
> > "The patch is checked and signed-off by the QA team member. Then the bug
> > status is set to Passed QA"
> Something I made during the 3.8 release was to add many things to the
> coding guidelines. My preference goes to QA rules that are clearly
> defined and explained. That will help QAing a lot, and "anyone" with a
> good Koha experience, and some time to dedicate should/could do it.
> 
> I agree that we *must* have a functional AND a technical review of every
> patch, the 2 steps are different.
> 
> > This will ensure that we have clarity that the patch was, indeed,
> > touched by a member of the QA team, as well as increasing the accuracy
> > of QA stats in git.
> Most QA is done in bugzilla only: when a patch is QAed, it's not
> signed-off & git bz attach most of the time.
> (that's also why your numbers below are meaningless : Ian has not made
> only 25 QA or joubu 5 ! OTOH, when I, as RM, push a patch, I always add
> my signature, that can be as RM or QA)

That's what Chris N was asking for, that a sign off is added when the
patch is tested, it must have been applied and tested, so why not sign
off and attach it back on the bug at the same time as changing the bug
status.

> 
> > 2. I propose that the RM be the QA of last resort. At present the stats
> > show that the RM is doing the majority of the QA'ing.
> As I just wrote, I don't do the majority of QA, (even if I agree I do a lot)
> 
> As I've said previously, as RM, I dedicate more than half of my time to
> this task.
> I think that we could have someone dedicated full time to QA and someone
> dedicated full time to sign-off. And until we won't... we will face this
> kind of trouble. Our workflow is good, but require a large effort we
> collectively fail to "pay" until now.
> 
> [ off-topic: BibLibre dedicate a lot of resources to Koha (see
> statistics on chris_c blog. A lot being "self-sponsored") and can't
> dedicate more. I think everybody should ask himself seriously "What did
> I do for Koha last week, what will I do next week ?" ]
> 
I'm not sure we want to get into a who does more for Koha contest, nor
do I think that was the point of this email.

I do think there are too many patches missing getting 2 independent
sign offs, and that is what we need to fix.

Chris

-- 
Chris Cormack
Catalyst IT Ltd.
+64 4 803 2238
PO Box 11-053, Manners St, Wellington 6142, New Zealand