Calendar:QA Chat:2006-11:16:Log

From MozillaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
<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 
<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 ( 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 ( and discuss the 
dependency on bug 164599 and the blockers in bug 298102
<firebot>	ctalbert: Bug nor, --, ---,, NEW, Week and Day Views need improvement
<firebot>	ctalbert: Bug nor, --, ---,, 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 nor, --, ---,, 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 
<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?
<Sebo>	I still didnt file the follow ups for bug 249796
<firebot>	Sebo: Bug
 maj, --, ---,, 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 maj, --, ---,, 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
<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 
<ctalbert>	Bug 340488 is next. It also needs testing.
<firebot>	ctalbert: Bug nor, --, ---,, 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
<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 nor, --, ---,, 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 nor, --, ---,, 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 maj, --, Sunbird 0.5,, 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 (Client exited)
<ssitter>	firebot: bug 312533
<firebot>	ssitter: Bug
 maj, --, ---,, UNCO, ftp support is gone in sunbird-1.2
<Sebo>	I can test comment 2
-->|	ulf ( 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.