canmove, Confirmed users
7,810
edits
QA/Fennec/Waverley/Postmortem/Fx5: Difference between revisions
→Take Aways
| (6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
** Waverley: Fennec : | ** Waverley: Fennec : | ||
*** Went well : Task for each build/channel and the adaptability to the new rapid process | *** Went well : Task for each build/channel and the adaptability to the new rapid process | ||
*** Communication can be improved | ** Waverley: Automation | ||
*** Went well : having henrik in our timestamp helps a lot. Also webQA team is very handy in communication, all Mozilla people are available constantly. Henrik said he has some ideas about improving communication. Communication can be improved | |||
* Are we communicating frequently enough? | * Are we communicating frequently enough? | ||
** Waverley:Desktop | ** Waverley:Desktop | ||
| Line 17: | Line 18: | ||
** Waverley: Fennec : | ** Waverley: Fennec : | ||
*** We consider that we could talk more, almost daily when a major task is given | *** We consider that we could talk more, almost daily when a major task is given | ||
** Waverley: Automation: | |||
*** We must communicate frequently with other from the automation teams. Desktop team misses the meeting, i don't like this. | |||
* Was turn-round time for resolving issues or questions adequate? | * Was turn-round time for resolving issues or questions adequate? | ||
** Waverley:Desktop | ** Waverley:Desktop | ||
| Line 32: | Line 35: | ||
** Waverley: Fennec : | ** Waverley: Fennec : | ||
*** we consider that they are appropriate | *** we consider that they are appropriate | ||
** Waveley: Automation | |||
*** we get many info from the sync pad, rather than wiki pages. sync pads are very thorough | |||
= Planning = | = Planning = | ||
| Line 79: | Line 84: | ||
= Take Aways = | = Take Aways = | ||
During the meeting we went through each of the sections and elaborated on the comments posted by the Waverley team. Among the topics discussed, some of the highlights where we could use improvement were: | |||
* Come up with a centralized wiki structure that allows people to navigate to the right milestones easily. | |||
* Establish a sort of office hours, where people from Mountain View can be available at certain times of the week, via IRC or Skype, in real time. | |||
* Avoid reading status reports. Talk about outstanding issues, task planning, and talk about information given out in meetings other people cannot attend. Use meeting time to raise outstanding issues that aren't getting traction. | |||
* Avoid scheduling more than one release at the same time, which is doable but tough. If we do need to turn around two releases or more, have a clear list of priorities. | |||
* Some issues do not get traction. So how do we draw attention to new issues so they don't get lost or stagnant in the New state? | |||
* There's a lot of effort going into vetting results and revising test cases in Litmus, but that is as valuable as the number of people using the system. We should keep promoting its use, such that the amount of work going into maintaining it does bear fruit. | |||
* Make it clear how to use flags and how to mark verified bugs. | |||
* During milestones, include feature sign-off tables. | |||
One recurrent theme during the postmortem was the organization of wikis and the need to updating in a timely manner. Information is not easy to find or navigate and a lot of it is outdated. In addition, MV office hours might help clear any issues for weekly tasks. Communication and dissemination of information is key. | |||
In general, we really appreciate the initiative and growing autonomy of the Waverley team as well as their direct involvement in new features, by attending providing feedback in feature meetings for example. | |||