Calendar:QA Chat:2006-11:16:Log
From MozillaWiki
<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.
