Calendar:QA Chat:2008-02-14:Log

[18:31] <mschroeder> It's QA chat time. Our agenda: http://wiki.mozilla.org/Calendar:QA_Chat:2008-02-14
[18:34] <mschroeder> okay... so our first topic: last testday
[18:35] <mschroeder> I think it was really successful. We had many Litmus testcases run, and also some confirmed bugs filed.
[18:35] <mschroeder> also have a look at: https://litmus.mozilla.org/testday_report.cgi?testday_id=86&include_admin=on
[18:35] <nth10sd> congrats to thetux!
[18:36] <ctalbert> I think we (aka me) ought to blog about these results.  That was a good habit and I just got too busy and got out of it.
[18:36] <mschroeder> yeah, he did a great job.
[18:36] * ctalbert takes taht one on
[18:36] <mschroeder> ctalbert: thanks
[18:36] <nth10sd> 210 is a substantial number
[18:38] <mschroeder> Our next testday will be on Thursday.
[18:38] <nth10sd> that's 21 Feb
[18:38] <mschroeder> I'll write the announcement (as usual). But what should concentrate on?
[18:39] <nth10sd> timezones
[18:39] <mschroeder> oh... theres a 'we' missing
[18:39] <Andreas> regressions in the RC?
[18:39] <nth10sd> (if bug 410931 lands by then)
[18:39] <firebot> nth10sd: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=410931 nor, --, ---, nth10sd@gmail.com, ASSI, Update internal timezone definitions
[18:39] <mschroeder> Andreas: if we have a RC by Thursday
[18:39] <ctalbert> I second both of those ideas
[18:39] <nth10sd> clint has test case there IIRC
[18:40] <mschroeder> agreed
[18:40] <Andreas> I hope so :-)
[18:40] <nth10sd> do we look likely to have an RC by thurs?
[18:40] <ctalbert> that's an upgrade testcase.  We could do a lot of other testing around timezones.  It'd be good to test upgrades with "old" timezones on ICS, caldav, storage, gdata, and WCAP calendars
[18:41] <ctalbert> I'd say we should plan that we will.
[18:41] <ctalbert> Or we'll have something very close to it
[18:41] <nth10sd> how about offline support. it's another pillar of the 0.8 release as well, besides timezones
[18:42] <nth10sd> and task view, the last one.
[18:42] <mschroeder> but offline support is only experimental
[18:43] <ctalbert> it would be good to know where the holes are in offline support so that simon can put some good release notes together for it
[18:43] <ctalbert> Like: offline support does x, y, and z but if you do a, b, c you will lose data.
[18:43] <ssitter> in my opinion the builds get more unstable recently. first the missing features should land and be tested, the regressions should be fixed etc. before an RC should be created
[18:44] <ctalbert> Unstable in what way?
[18:44] <nth10sd> his draft release notes are in http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/releases/lightning0.8.html
[18:44] <nth10sd> sunbird's not out yet though
[18:45] <Andreas> The RC should be created when all blocker bugs are fixed.
[18:45] <mschroeder> ctalbert: What about the blocking0.8? bugs? Who is going to triage them?
[18:45] <ctalbert> ssitter: How are you judging that the latest builds are unstable?  I don't doubt what you say at all, but I am interested in your opinion.
[18:46] <ctalbert> mschroeder: I'll give simon a call about that.
[18:46] <ctalbert> or email, he's not online atm
[18:48] <mschroeder> ctalbert: okay
[18:48] <ctalbert> email set
[18:48] <nth10sd> can we ignore wanted0.8+ bugs for the moment?
[18:48] <ctalbert> n
[18:48] <ctalbert> Those will probably be rolled into 0.9
[18:48] <mschroeder> nth10sd: yep. too late in the game.
[18:48] <nth10sd> true
[18:50] <nth10sd> ctalbert: pls have a look at bug 415956 ; martin and i don't know why berend would nominate a fixed bug as blocking0.8?
[18:50] <firebot> nth10sd: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=415956 nor, --, ---, philipp@bugzilla.kewis.ch, RESO FIXED, Unifinder is always sorted by event title after startup (not as expected)
[18:50] <ctalbert> what is up with that?
[18:51] <nth10sd> ignoring this anomaly, there's still 17 blocking0.8+ and 17 blocking0.8?
[18:51] <nth10sd> he set blocking0.8? while marking it fixed.
[18:51] <ctalbert> I'm much more concerned about ssitter's point.  Why did it go to fixed if it isn't checked in
[18:52] <nth10sd> yeah, there's something not done quite right.
[18:52] <Andreas> I will talk to Berend tomorrow whats goinig on with this bug, okay
[18:52] <ctalbert> sounds good.  I'm going to unmark it as fixed in the meantime with a comment
[18:52] <nth10sd> ok
[18:53] <mschroeder> ctalbert: sorry, already re-opened it
[18:53] <firebot> mschroeder@mozilla.x-home.org cleared the Resolution 'FIXED' from bug 415956.
[18:55] <mschroeder> I've created a test plan wiki page: http://wiki.mozilla.org/Calendar:QA_Test_Plan_0.8
[18:55] <ctalbert> Andreas: I think that Berend was bit by the bugzilla "ever so intuitive" UI.
[18:55] <ctalbert> ;-)
[18:56] <Andreas> +1
[18:56] <mschroeder> It's not complete yet, but should give you an idea.
[18:56] <nth10sd> looks good
[18:57] <ctalbert> Looks very good. 
[18:57] <ctalbert> What kind of update testing were you planning?
[18:57] <ctalbert> 0.5->0.8, 0.7 -> 0.8.  Are you planning to go all the way back to 0.3.1?
[18:57] * ctalbert votes for 0.7->0.8
[18:58] <mschroeder> I think we should include 0.5->0.8.
[18:58] <nth10sd> +1 for 0.5 and 0.7 testing
[18:59] <nth10sd> some users remained on 0.5 as they kinda didn't like 0.7's today pane or something like that
[18:59] <firebot> ctalbert@mozilla.com granted blocking-calendar0.8 on bug 415956.
[18:59] <ctalbert> that's probably smart to go back to 0.5.  We'll need help to get that done.
[18:59] <ssitter> ctalbert: sorry, I was occupied for some minutes
[19:01] <nth10sd> should we tell 0.3 / 0.3.1 users that migration from these versions to 0.8 wasn't comprehensively tested then?
[19:01] <ssitter> we probably should do also the 0.3->0.8 path to check the database upgrade stuff (esp. after the tz update)
[19:01] <ctalbert> ssitter: I was thinking about that too since 0.3.1 was the last database upgrade
[19:02] <nth10sd> (that's basically almost all versions then, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
[19:02] <ctalbert> That's a pretty big test matrix
[19:02] <nth10sd> i have another idea: 2 testdays on 2 weeks?
[19:03] <mschroeder> nth10sd: We will have at least an additional QA working session to concetrate on our testplan.
[19:04] <nth10sd> sure
[19:05] <ssitter> I think at least the database update is not platform or application specific
[19:06] <mschroeder> hm... okay. then we'll try to do it.
[19:07] <mschroeder> But I want migration testing on all platforms for preferences and UI. We don't want to have the same problems as last time.
[19:08] <ssitter> in addition we need smoketest for all locales
[19:09] <mschroeder> ctalbert: When are you going to review the last patch from Gary's timezone bug?
[19:09] <ssitter> or go the firefox way and release only locales that were tested and signed off by the corresponding l10n team
[19:09] <mschroeder> ssitter: l10n testing is also on the wiki page, and I'll add a list with all locales .
[19:09] <ctalbert> mschroeder: today
[19:10] <ctalbert> I got all the minotaur stuff coded late last night, so I have more bandwidth today
[19:10] <ctalbert> :-)
[19:11] <mschroeder> so you defeated Minotaur last night :))
[19:12] <nth10sd> minotaur... hmmm I remember it used to be the name prior to Thunderbird as well
[19:12] <ctalbert> heh
[19:13] <mschroeder> Talos, Minotaur... Firefox QA likes Greek names
[19:14] <mschroeder> okay. I'll add some of he stuff mentioned here to the test plan wiki page later.
[19:15] <mschroeder> No news on the AIs from me.
[19:16] <Andreas> I checked all the litmus test cases with a comment and adjusted the text.
[19:16] <mschroeder> Andreas: wow, that's awesome.
[19:16] <mschroeder> Andreas: those from the testday last week?
[19:16] <ctalbert> Andreas ++
[19:17] <Andreas> Yes
[19:17] <mschroeder> okay
[19:17] <Andreas> I found some test cases with older comments, too.
[19:18] <nth10sd> super
[19:19] <mschroeder> Have you found testcases that need to be deleted because they aren't applicable anymore?
[19:22] <Andreas> I only checked test cases with comments.
[19:22] <Andreas> I think there a some outdated test cases
[19:23] <Andreas> but this is a good job after the RC release, maybe.
[19:24] <mschroeder> I agree. We should concentrate on the RC release, (possible) blocking bugs, and testing.
[19:24] <mschroeder> ... and we still have unverified bugs. ;)
[19:25] <Andreas> yes, thats correct.
[19:25] <mschroeder> I'll try to work through these tomorrow.
[19:26] <mschroeder> Anything you want to talk about regarding Calendar QA?
[19:28] <mschroeder> Okay. That's the end of the QA chat. Thanks for attending. :)