Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of yanji.yj@gmail.com designates
 209.85.220.175 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAP-ksohcDmB0frRYyA4tfGZZb=FdQ9+ey1+E8xeNGdVEhaJ1Fg@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAJ+c7QzZhzhTpSBhioh=aAncGf2KgG7LzBDoFjn1xFfyzCWF0Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<1345218901.2676.1.camel@sybil-gnome>
	<CAP-ksoiJXr8ASYO4LquhbQWjdNvA5s5Frkdhp5wLdEbec9YrJw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1345219630.2676.4.camel@sybil-gnome>
	<CAP-ksohcDmB0frRYyA4tfGZZb=FdQ9+ey1+E8xeNGdVEhaJ1Fg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 12:41:01 +0800
Message-ID: 
 <CAJ+c7QzHuuOD3ZgmdWb7C6pkYrxHoJsyqVggcCpGv6ciYCsDsw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Extend release vote till after testing? (was: Re: [QA Report]AOO
 3.4.1 RC2 rev 1372282 Test Report(w/o long run testing))
From: Ji Yan <yanji.yj@gmail.com>
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf30780dc8e8854504c7ab1dd4

--20cf30780dc8e8854504c7ab1dd4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

We did manual and automation test against the RC build. From the test
result, it looks good enough to support vote +1. Long run testing will keep
running over 130 hours, for what I can tell now, the test runs smoothly, we
may need another 60 hours to complete the whole test. But I don't see any
reason to demote this RC.(Anyway RC vote is already closed) If there is any
critical issue found, we will speak out in time.

2012/8/18 Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org>

> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:07 PM, drew <drew@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-08-17 at 12:02 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:55 AM, drew <drew@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > My recollection is that the email for voting on the release said the
> >> > vote would run till tomorrow - but it sounds like formal testing is
> not
> >> > finished till Monday.
> >> >
> >> > Should the final vote not wait till after the testing is finished?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Not necessarily. Just because someone calls their tests "formal" does
> >> not mean we need to wait for them. My tests are just as valid as your
> >> test or anyone else's tests.
> >>
> >> I think we can move ahead, if the PPMC vote passes, and start the IPMC
> >> process.    Of course, if at any time someone finds a showstopper
> >> issue, we can cancel the vote, at any stage.  Even if a showstopper
> >> issue is found after the IPMC vote and minutes before we announce, we
> >> can still recall the release. There is no train on autopilot here.
> >>
> >
> > Ah ok - and your opinion on the specific of this question about the
> > current release is - Yes, wait for Monday or No, don't wait?
> >
>
> My opinion:
>
> 1) There is no limit to how much testing we can do on a release.  Any
> decision to end testing is arbitrary.  We could always take more time
> and do more kinds of tests, in more variations.
>
> 2) The proposal of this release candidate and the timing of it should
> not be surprising to any member of the community.  It has been the
> primary topic of conversation on this list for nearly a month.
>
> 3) Just as it is the responsibility of every programmer to get their
> code submitted in time for the RC, and for every translator to get
> their translations submitted in time for the RC, it is the
> responsibility of ever tester to get their tests done in time.
>
> 4) If anyone thought that there were critical tests that must be
> performed, but these tests could not be performed before the release
> vote ended, then they should have spoken up quite a long time ago.
>
> 5) We're currently holding back fixes from our users, some quite
> critical, by delaying the release.
>
> We gain absolutely nothing by delaying the vote.  If we delay and
> nothing is found then we've wasted time.  If we don't delay and we
> find a bug then we go back and cut a new Release Candidate.  But we
> should we assume that further testing is going to find a show stopping
> bug?  That doesn't make sense to me.
>
> > I would wait.
> >
>
> And what if I said I had even more tests that I wanted to run, but
> they would take two weeks more?
>
> -Rob
>
> > Thanks
> >
> > ps - just forget I used the word formal in the question, if that helps.
> >
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >> > Thanks
> >> >
> >> > //drew
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, 2012-08-17 at 23:33 +0800, Ji Yan wrote:
> >> >> We did RC build test against RC2 rev. 1372282. Here is the report
> >> >> 1. BVT passed [1]
> >> >> 2. PVT is done [2]
> >> >> 3. Automation FVT passed [3]
> >> >> 4. Installation test complete [4]
> >> >> 5. General testing is done [5]
> >> >> 6. Native build testing [6]
> >> >>
> >> >> We are doing long run testing this weekend, and I'll bring the
> report next
> >> >> Monday.
> >> >>
> >> >> [1]
> >> >>
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/QA/Report/BVT#BVT_Report_for_AOO3.4.1_Branch_r1372282
> >> >> [2]
> >> >>
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/QA/AOO341_PVTResult#PVT_report_on_3.4.1_RC1_r1372282
> >> >> [3]
> >> >>
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/QA/Report/FVT#FVT_Report_for_AOO3.4.1_Branch_r1372282
> >> >> [4]
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/QA/AOO341_RC_TestResult#Installer_2
> >> >> [5]
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/QA/AOO341_RC_TestResult#Rev._1372282
> >> >> [6]
> >> >>
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/QA/AOO341_RC_TestResult#Native_Build_Testing
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>


-- 


Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji

--20cf30780dc8e8854504c7ab1dd4--