[Cosmo-dev] Cosmo release meeting notes for 2007-07-19

[Aparna Kadakia]

Apart from the collaborative QA session at 1 pm today we are also  
doing a 11:00 AM PPD-QA session in the #osaf-qa channel.
People are welcome to participate.

Few other comments below:

On Jul 20, 2007, at 7:25 AM, Jared Rhine wrote:

> Enclosed below are the meeting notes (with key decisions at top)  
> from the Cosmo release meeting of Thursday 2007-07-19.
>
> Proposed Friday 2007-07-20 schedule
>   - 1pm: Cosmo collaborative session
>   - 2pm: Cosmo bug council
>   - 3pm: Cosmo release meeting with QA
>
> Decisions from this meeting:
>   - We need to have an additional release meeting, before OSCON, which
>     includes QA.  Which means Friday.  3pm proposed.
>
>   - We need to have a collaborative QA session.  Hopefully a Friday
>     1pm session is on-track.
>
>   - Katie to send out a call highlighting that "Cosmo testing is on
>     Preview critical path" and encourage additional QA help.
>
>   - There will be no Cosmo 0.6.1.2 release planned yet.  The current
>     status doesn't mandate one.
>
> Tickets to open
>   - Ted to open a ticket for a "one-command/one-place" enhancement
>     (post-Preview).
>   - Jared to open ticket requesting a service update validation script
>     from QA.
>   - Bear to move tbox to qasharing 0.7 as soon as Philippe signed off.
>
> Current status
> - twl: Mikeal and Adam out at OSCON next week.
> - twl: So testing will be less than hoped for.  Even puts 2 week  
> slip at risk.
> - twl: Rate of incoming bugs is too low
> - twl: Windmill does not test dashboard
But most of the Dashboard has been manually tested right now. A  
significant portion of the tests will get automated as soon as the  
new registry IDs are made available to Adam from the Devs.
> - twl: Devs will start writing windmill as soon as they run out of  
> tasks (early next week)
> - twl: Randy and Brian have already run out of work
> - twl: matt also leaving for oscon
>
> Testing status
> - jared: 3 types (unit, windmill, protocol) have passed in 0.7;
>   remaining manual tests and schema migration are under-tested
> - bear: tbox runs unit tests every time; well-tested
> - bear: tbox runs windmill too, but there are windmill errors
> - twl: list of test cases seems kind of short

Ted, can you elaborate on which testcases you are specifically  
talking about? Ones in the test spec or in Windmill? Windmill covers  
about 60% of the app, even though most of it is 0.6.1. We've really  
not had very clear design specs to write off the test spes on.  
Whatever I have gathered in the test spec is based on my conversation  
with Mimi and Sheila over time and referring to the MockUpGuide and  
the StrawManProposal documents attached in the spec. I think the test  
specs cover the individual features pretty well. It's the more  
integration type(desktop-to-server-and-back) testing that we need  
more coverage on.
>
> Testing next steps
> - jared: propose an additional release meeting friday.
> - jared: also should really run collaborative session friday
> - bear: ready to move chandler tbox to qasharing 0.7
> - capps: check with philippe for moving tbox to qasharing
> - capps: is testing cosmo the critical path for preview?
> - capps: need for more dashboard coverage mentioned.  are we looking
>   for more spec coverage or more dogfooding?
> - twl: ideally, both.  web ui testing is most important
> - capps: there have been some very effective test sessions driven by
>   mimi, sheila, and aparna together running through workflows.  maybe
>   focus friday on specific cases.
Yes, we are going to engage more and more into these collaborative  
sessions that have been immensely helpful in finding bugs.

> - capps: getting other chandler devs involved in testing, around
>   specific feature areas would be good.
> - jared: we have a good list of testing types.  how much additional
>   detail about each test category do we need?
> - twl: yeah, we need to get to more detail about the categories to
>   drive testing areas
>
I believe the individual features like the Dashboard and the Detail  
View have been quite thoroughly tested manually. What we need more is  
the work-flow oriented testing now.

> Other release work
> - twl: what about my tix: security review, and rebranding.  security
>   review has made reasonable progress with travis assigned.
>   rebranding work seems closed.
> - twl: randy has time to review the runbook
> - jared: release notes still not kicked off
> - jared: noted that cosmo and chandler have different definitions for
>   code complete
> - jared: is current release meeting pace still good?
> - twl: yeah, current meeting pace is good.  frequent should increase
>   at code complete.
> - capps: aparna was seeking a driver for migration testing.  need to
>   resolve that.
> - twl: it'd be awesome to run one-command to know that everything has
>   been run
> - capps: log that as a bug
> - bear: can't be done because of divergence of qa framework from maven
>   framework
> - twl: if bear has extra time, getting started on maven-integrated
>   code metrics would be awesome.  bear was planning on it starting
>   next week.
> - jared: the 0.7 wiki updates might need help.  twl: we'll address
>   after code complete.
>
> Icalender UIDs
> - capps: ok with this issue?
> - twl: was fine, but randy's produced a code fix, giving us options
> - capps: sounds reasonable to implement restriction on server
> release meeting friday schedule:
> - after the bug council (3pm slot)
> - ted: bug council at 2pm, collaborative at 1pm
> _______________________________________________
> cosmo-dev mailing list
> cosmo-dev at lists.osafoundation.org
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/cosmo-dev