<ctalbert> We'll start the calendar-qa chat in a few moments. Let
me try to wake up lilmatt
<lilmatt> ok
<lilmatt> I'm here now
<ctalbert> Sweet.
<ctalbert> Would you mind posting the log from today's chat to the wiki?
=-= Sebo|away is now known as Sebo
<lilmatt> ok
<ctalbert> Yea!
<ctalbert> Let's get started.
<ctalbert> I have not posted or counted the results from the test
day, so there is not much to say about that. I hope to get to that
stuff today.
<ctalbert> Anyone have any other feedback from the test day?
<ctalbert> Sounds like no...
<ctalbert> We need to discuss the schedule because there are several holidays coming up.
<ctalbert> First, next Thursday is the US Thanksgiving holiday. I
will be unavailable to run this meeting.
<ctalbert> Do we want to just skip it, or does someone else want
to run it?
<jminta> ctalbert: maybe we should shift the times to correspond
to the nightlies?
<jminta> i think there was some confusion about that last time
<ctalbert> That sounds like a good idea. There was lots of confusion
about that.
<jminta> (sorry, delayed reaction)
<ctalbert> it's ok
<Sebo> yes there was confusion...
<ctalbert> Unfortunately the litmus tests for the migrator did
not seem to make it in by the test day either, so that also created
confusion.
<ctalbert> I should have looked into that but I was a bit busy
finishing the migrator code :-)
<ssitter> lilmatt: could we shift the nightly build from 06:00
to e.g. 04:00 to get more test time for us europeans?
<Sebo> but the problem is rather that we shouldn't again focus a test
day on a very recent checkin
<lilmatt> i can check with #build to make sunre that doesn't
conflict with anything,
-->| ulf (ulf@moz-97C4ECBB.dip.t-dialin.net) has joined #calendar-qa
<ssitter> lilmatt: that would be fine :-)
<ctalbert> Sebo, I agree but it is good to try to have the testdays
focus on new features as they land. Perhaps they should just not focus
on features that landed *the night before.*
<Sebo> ctalbert: I disagree. Let the usual testers (us) test it first
before it goes to a test day
<ssitter> yep, there should be at least one or two nightly builds
with this feature before
<ctalbert> I was just about to say that.
<ulf> hi, everybody
<Sebo> ok, two builds in advance should be ok.
<ctalbert> Hey ulf!
<ctalbert> Alright, so the deadline for features making a test day
would be the Friday before.
<ctalbert> This ties into the schedule issue, because of the holiday
next week, I doubt any new features will be ready (or pre-tested) by the
test day on the 28th.
<ctalbert> Should we skip Tuesday the 28th, and hold the next test
day on December 5? (one week later).
<ctalbert> What do you think?
<Sebo> no prob
<ctalbert> That will also give Damian and I enough time to sort out
some Litmus stuff too.
<ctalbert> Let's do that, then.
<ctalbert> I'm going to rearrange the agenda (http://wiki.mozilla.org/Calendar:Current_QA_Chat) and discuss the
dependency on bug 164599 and the blockers in bug 298102
<firebot> ctalbert: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=164599 nor, --, ---,
nobody@mozilla.org, NEW, Week and Day Views need improvement
<firebot> ctalbert: Bug
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=298102 nor, --, ---,
nobody@mozilla.org, NEW, Item dialog: A merge of mozcal/sunbird event/task
dialog and lightning event dialog.
<ctalbert> Sebo, do you want to take the lead here, I think it was
your agenda item.
<Sebo> I added this some time ago
<Sebo> the dependencies on those two bugs just look strange to me
<Sebo> look at the dependency tree for bug 164599
<ctalbert> I see. And the dependecy list for 298102 is stunning.
<Sebo> yes
<Sebo> but if this is correct from a coding point of view, thats fine
<ctalbert> jminta or lilmatt: do you have any input on these two bugs?
<ssitter> what is the topic with 298102?
<ssitter> the old dialog was replaced with the new one
<ctalbert> ssitter that's what I was thinking too
<ssitter> sun is working on another prototype dialog
<ctalbert> gekachecka is still around, we should probably just ask
him what the status of this bug is.
<Sebo> so this isnt really about a merge but about a rewrite?
<ctalbert> Because his basic design is generally what we currently
have implemented, except I like our implementation better.
<ctalbert> Sebo, yes, I believe so. It's about a merge/rewrite that
has basically already happened.
<ctalbert> My judgement above is from viewing attachment 208594
<ssitter> it's similar to the new dialog that was introduced in
0.3a1 or 0.3a2
<ssitter> but i think it's a different development gekachecka did
<Sebo> ok, so if this bug is rather invalid, then it shouldnt blog all
the others
<ctalbert> that's true. I'll ask gekachecka what (if anything) he
intends to do with this bug, and maybe we can get him to clean it up.
<Sebo> sorry, phone...
<Sebo> ok, Im back
<ctalbert> And for 164599, we should add a comment inviting these
people to submit feedbcack on Christian's new views post. They should
get involved with that, if they still have ideas on the week view.
<ctalbert> Because bug 164599 is very very old.
<firebot> ctalbert: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=164599 nor, --, ---,
nobody@mozilla.org, NEW, Week and Day Views need improvement
<Sebo> yes, and to address comment 13 on this bug
<Sebo> (wrong dependency)
<ctalbert> right
<Sebo> should we just clear dependency or should one ask on the bug
first?
<ctalbert> I think we can clear the dependency on 164599, but I want
to ask before we do anything with 298102
<Sebo> actually, if this bug gets closed anyway, that doesnt matter...
<ctalbert> Shall we go on to the QA wanted list? https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&product=Calendar&keywords=qawanted
<Sebo> I still didnt file the follow ups for bug 249796
<firebot> Sebo: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=249796
maj, --, ---, nobody@mozilla.org, NEW, I am unable to configure user/password
when wanting to publish my calendar to a remote location
<Sebo> I will do this today
<Sebo> (this was discussed last week)
<ctalbert> ok. Sounds good.
<ctalbert> I'll go from the top of that list quickly through these.
<ctalbert> Ulf, has anyone on your team seen bug 287514?
<firebot> ctalbert: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=287514 maj, --, ---,
nobody@mozilla.org, UNCO, printing segfaults on solaris
<ctalbert> I think you're the only person on the channel right now with
access to solaris systems.
<ulf> ctalbert, yes; but couldn't reproduce if I remember correctly. I'll
take care for this bug
<ctalbert> ok, thanks.
<ctalbert> 312914 is waiting on response from the reporter.
<ctalbert> I also need to try that, it seems I'd done something really
dumb the other week and caused this problem. I'll see if I can find the
steps again.
<ctalbert> Although when I saw it, it wasn't as severe, sunbird continued to load just fine.
<ctalbert> which makes one wonder about why it threw the message anyway
<ctalbert> Sebo, we need to ask the reporter in 347128 for his FTP server
settings, correct?
<Sebo> looks like I also forgot this, sorry
<Fallen|away> I have solaris systems in my university, but I don't know
in how far restricted they are.
<ctalbert> That's ok. I need to look at 348806 with ical.app
<ctalbert> 327752 needs testing. Any takers?
<Sebo> actually I dont know how to do this with Win XP
<Sebo> can it be a webDAV server?
<ctalbert> Let me ask around and see if my office has a Windows 2003
server as part of our MSDN subscription.
<ctalbert> I can look into that one.
-->| Andreas (chatzilla@9DFAC2CE.4C00166E.33AABD5F.IP) has joined
#calendar-qa
<ctalbert> Bug 340488 is next. It also needs testing.
<firebot> ctalbert: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=340488 nor, --, ---,
nobody@mozilla.org, UNCO, birthday's listed double after upgrade to a new
sunbird version
<ctalbert> The migrator might help solve that one, actually.
<Sebo> ok, I have 0.2 installed now, I will try this one
<ctalbert> cool.
<Sebo> ctalbert: does migrator do something else (other then opening the ics?)
<ctalbert> The migrator should import the ICS plus your calendars and
calendar colors when upgrading from sunbird 0.2 to 0.3
<ctalbert> er to 0.4a+
<ssitter> does the migrator works on some systems now?
<Sebo> ha
<ctalbert> I haven't tried it since the test day. The migrator itself
is QAWANTED.
<ctalbert> I will flag the migrator's defect as qawanted so it shows
up on our list. We need to be sure there aren't any other bugs in it.
<ctalbert> Fallen|away: did you have any luck with the OpenExchange
server, bug 339960 depends on that
<firebot> ctalbert: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=339960 nor, --, ---,
nobody@mozilla.org, UNCO, event editor adds 2 hours to time when saving
to webdav
<ssitter> ctalbert: if the problem is confirmed and can be
reproduced the qawanted should be removed I would say
<ctalbert> ssitter, I agree. Which bug are you referring to?
<ctalbert> oh the migrator bug.
<ssitter> > I will flag the migrator's defect as qawanted so
it shows up on our list.
<ssitter> that bugs
<ctalbert> That makes sense. I guess the more proper thing to
do is add the migrator to the Qa Todo list.
<ctalbert> ssitter, you've tested bug 338227, do you think we can
remove the qawanted field?
<firebot> ctalbert: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=338227 nor, --, ---,
nobody@mozilla.org, UNCO, Switching the input language has side effects
<ctalbert> Sounds like the reporter might just have a problem with
windows in general (re-mapping ctrl+esc)
<ssitter> let's close it as wfm
<ctalbert> ok.
<ctalbert> lilmatt, ssitter the next one is up to you as well. Bug
353722 should we WFM it or dup it with 268042?
<firebot> ctalbert: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=353722 maj, --, Sunbird 0.5,
nobody@mozilla.org, NEW, character escaping issues cause data corruption
<Fallen|away> ctalbert: I got cosmo running, openexchange is a bit harder.
It wants all sorts of java things and java is a bitch with virtual servers,
since it wants so many privileged VM pages.
<Fallen|away> I am trying to get my admin to make that number higher, but
I already have more than usual vserver users
<ctalbert> Fallen|away: Thanks for the update.
<ssitter> can't we just get more information from dmose on 353722 since
he reported this issue?
<ctalbert> ssitter: good point, I had forgotten that fact.
<ctalbert> 293562 is still waiting on a reporter's response.
<ssitter> ok, would someone do a second test for 338227 and close the
bug wfm if everything is ok?
<ctalbert> ok. I'll do that.
<ssitter> ctalbert: thanks
<ctalbert> We covered 249796
<ctalbert> 312533 is still unconfirmed.
|<-- ulf has left irc.mozilla.org (Client exited)
<ssitter> firebot: bug 312533
<firebot> ssitter: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=312533
maj, --, ---, nobody@mozilla.org, UNCO, ftp support is gone in sunbird-1.2
<Sebo> I can test comment 2
-->| ulf (ulf@moz-97C4ECBB.dip.t-dialin.net) has joined #calendar-qa
<ctalbert> ok. Sounds good.
<ctalbert> That's the QAWanted list, I believe.
<ulf> sorry, core dumped
<ctalbert> ulf: ouch!
<ctalbert> Ok, anyone else have anything to discuss we're just
slightly over on time.
<ssitter> at the moment we have 249 UNCO bugs open
<Sebo> ooops
<ssitter> 142 without enhancements
<ctalbert> We should work on getting those back down.
<ssitter> would be nice if we could lower that number
<ctalbert> I defnitely agree.
<ctalbert> ssitter, do you have advice for confirming enhancement bugs?
<ctalbert> How has that traditionally been done in the past? I'm a
little unclear on it.
<ctalbert> (w.r.t. the calendar project)
<ssitter> what does confirming enhancement bugs mean? does that
mean: good idea, we will implement it soon?
<ctalbert> That's what I would think it means. For example, if the enhancement is something that we are currently discussing implementing, then
it makes sense to confirm it.
<ssitter> i have no problem leaving enhancement bugs unconfirmed
in favor of sorting out the error bugs
<ctalbert> Ok. I have tended to feel the same way.
<ctalbert> Anyone have anything else?
<ctalbert> ssitter: thanks for the advice
<Sebo> just out of curiosity: is there going to be a blogging0.5 flag?
<jminta> blocking0.5? yes
<Sebo> blocking
<ctalbert> probably when we get closer to a release date
<jminta> i can probably get mconnor to set it up on 30min notice
<Sebo> ok, so we are closer in 30 min :-)
<ctalbert> Should we go ahead and do that so that we have it?
(seems like a good idea)
<jminta> maybe
<ctalbert> It's probably up to lilmatt -- if he wants to start
using it or not. He seems to be the "driver by default" of the release.
<jminta> yes
<ssitter> would be nice to mark the regressions and nits from
0.3 that 'should' be fixed for 0.5 to not lose them
<Sebo> thats true
<ctalbert> That's exactly why I'd like to have it.
<ctalbert> lilmatt: you there?
<ctalbert> He's probably still feeling jet lagged from the trip
across the country
<ctalbert> We'll take that up later when he returns.
<jminta> yes
<ctalbert> Okay, let's call this the end of the QA Chat. Please
try to test the QAWanted and Unconfirmed bugs this next week.