QA/Execution/Meetings/2009-02-11: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

QA/Execution/Meetings/2009-02-11 (view source)

Revision as of 22:16, 11 February 2009

2,791 bytes added , 11 February 2009

no edit summary

Tomcat

Confirmed users

2,317

edits

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 *** ''discussion'' - should have a vetting process for community members who want admin access.  '''(marcia)''' and '''(tomcat)''' to work on a guide to demonstrate they are behaving properly.
 ''**** We have not yet created a policy document. We also need to figure out what to do with Product Community leads and whether or not they should have product specific badges?''
+**** '''(marcia, timr)''' to sit down and talk about how to draft this up before the workweek.
 *** ''discussion'' - for content issues, should we review what content is posted before allowing it on QMO?   '''(marcia)''' and '''(tomcat)''' to work on a policy guide.
 ''**** Content Policy guide has been created and reviewed by Tomcat. Posted to QMO on Monday. Because there is no way to know daily what content has been added, as Owner of this area I feel more comfortable having a process where we can review content.  This was done informally via email in one case with stephen and a community member. This is just formalizing that process.''
 ***  Opinion: Defining guidelines and expecting contributors to follow those guidelines is a good idea. However, throwing up road blocks to the community is a terrible idea.  This isn't software code that requires a review process to protect an application.  Just deal with inappropriate content as it shows up. Has it been an overwhelming problem so far?  (Tracy)
+*** Opinion: I'm with Tracy.  I think that setting an expectation (by example, through the QMO blog etc of what is and isn't appropriate content is a far more useful and inclusive way to go about achieving the goal of "no inappropriate content" than putting up road blocks to contribution by design.  Ideally we want  self-policing community here.  Not one more thing we'd have to manage.  (ctalbert)
+*** '''UPDATE''' - ('''marcia''', '''murali''', '''tomcat''', '''jay'''), will look at drupal creating roles, allowing users to create a new post and have the message sent to the admin to review and accept.
+**** See {{Bug|471282}} for integrating the Notify Module into QMO
 * QA for rtl locales (henrik)
 ** 3 offical locales in the tree (Hebrew, Arabic, and Persian) and Afghanistan in beta state
@@ Line 26: / Line 29: @@
 ** No-one from QA is covering this area?
 ** There are regressions from FF3.0. Some ui changes were reviewed without testing the patch on rtl locales
+*** '''DISCUSSION''' - '''(henrik, timr)''' talk to the RTL community in the l10n meeting next week, and see if they have thoughts on creating a separate smoketest group.  Or maybe include it in the existing L10n localizer run?
 = Project Updates =
 * Firefox 3.0.7 (abillings)
+** QA gets builds on 2/17 - begins smokestests and such
+** Goes to Beta on 2/24
+** Test plan is [https://wiki.mozilla.org/Releases/Firefox_3.0.7/Test_Plan available].
 * Firefox 3.1 (tchung)
@@ Line 39: / Line 46: @@
 * 3.0 -> 3.1b3 major update trial run (abillings)
 ** Test Plan is [https://wiki.mozilla.org/QA/Firefox3/TestPlan/MajorUpdate/Results:3.0.6_fx3.1b3 available]
+** Testing after Firefox 3.1b3 is built. Probably using Firefox 3.0.7 as the base for the update.
 * Webdev update (stephend)
+** [https://wiki.mozilla.org/Update:Remora_Meeting_Notepad AMO 5.0.2]
+*** Working on it, shipping the 19th
+** [https://wiki.mozilla.org/Support/SUMOdev_Meeting_Notepad#Next_releases SUMO 0.9]
+*** Working on it, shipping the 19th
+** [https://wiki.mozilla.org/SFx_redesign_timeline Spread Firefox redesign]
+*** Now in a day-to-day slip, with the same ship date of March 4 (!)
+** [https://wiki.mozilla.org/Mozilla.com_all.html/Test_Plan All.html] testing
+*** On schedule and looking good
+** GetPersonas.com redesign
+*** Launching early to mid-March
+*** Still in the scoping phase from QA
+**** Using the [https://wiki.mozilla.org/QA/Execution/Web_Testing/Support_Levels support-level guidelines] to help us determine the test approach
 * Mobile update (jmaher)
+** windows mobile milestone release yesterday
+** plan for maemo beta1 and windows mobile alpha1 at end of month
+** Still need to do work on test plan and adding litmus test cases
+** dev team is growing and they will be moving faster
+** Automation work to port unit tests are nearing completion
 * Litmus results cleanup project (tracy)
+** in maintain mode; review and vet a couple times per week.
 * Accessibility update (MarcoZ)
+** ARIA 1.0 is nearing completion, and thus a few patches landed on 3.2a1pre that were also nominated for 3.1 and which I tested.
+** Some major refactoring work going on in a11y module in mozilla-central, due to good test coverage we're in good shape, though.
+** Major GMail a11y fix landed on Firefox 3.0.7 last week, having to do with not being able to open messages for reading from a screen reader. Verified that this landed properly.
 -----
 Other topics?