Calendar:QA Chat:2007-06-07:Log
From MozillaWiki
You were promoted to operator by ChanServ. [09:28am] mschroeder: Good morning Clint. [09:29am] ctalbert: Good morning, afternoon [09:30am] ctalbert: I believe it's QA Chat time isn't it? [09:30am] mschroeder: it's already 6:30 pm [09:30am] ctalbert: Being out here always messes me up. [09:30am] mschroeder: you're right [09:30am] ctalbert: Geez. Good evening! [09:31am] ctalbert: Yep. So. [09:31am] ctalbert: QA Chat [09:31am] ctalbert: I think that the alarm fix was reviewed and checked in yesterday... [09:32am] mschroeder: I don't think so. [09:32am] ctalbert: Oh nope. [09:32am] ctalbert: It was the wcap version change that daniel was asking me about [09:33am] mschroeder: correct [09:33am] ctalbert: So, we are still waiting for the alarm fix to land. And it is still awaiting review [09:34am] ctalbert: I learned yesterday that the access level changes to litmus will be landing this week. So, if anything happens to those of you with Litmus Admin accounts, please let either me, Zach or Coop know. You can find those two guys on #litmus and/or #qa. [09:36am] ctalbert: I'll be on vacation from June 13 through June 20, and will be pretty much unavailable during that time. I'll have a cell phone, and I might be checking email once in a while. lilmatt knows how to catch me on cell phone if anyone absolutely needs me. [09:37am] ctalbert: That's about all the news I have [09:37am] ctalbert: So....QA Discussion Bugs? [09:37am] ctalbert: Anyone else have news? [09:38am] mschroeder: no news [09:38am] ctalbert: cool. no news is good news, they say [09:38am] ctalbert: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&product=Calendar&status_whiteboard_type=substring&status_whiteboard=%5Bqa+discussion+needed%5D&order=Bug+Number [09:38am] ctalbert: Wow, only 4 [09:39am] mschroeder: We cleaned it last week. [09:39am] ctalbert: Just start with the first one, bug 177586 [09:39am] firebot: ctalbert: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=177586 nor, --, ---, nobody@mozilla.org, NEW, Turn calendar into a global service [09:39am] ctalbert: I remember [09:39am] ctalbert: It is a nice feeling to only see 4! [09:39am] mschroeder: I found this one while clicking through some old bugs. [09:39am] ctalbert: 2002!! [09:40am] mschroeder: lilmatt left a commnent in January [09:40am] ctalbert: I think we may want an alarm service to run at OS startup, but I think that should be a separate issue. [09:40am] ctalbert: Let's close INVALID [09:40am] mschroeder: agreed [09:41am] firebot: ctalbert@mozilla.com set the Resolution field on bug 177586 to INVALID. [09:41am] ctalbert: next: bug 357493 [09:41am] firebot: ctalbert: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=357493 maj, --, ---, nobody@mozilla.org, UNCO, Lightning unable to install if profile is stored on a fat32/vfat partition on Linux [09:42am] mschroeder: You wanted to ask daniel on that. (if i remember correctly) [09:42am] ctalbert: I did, and never got any response from him [09:43am] ctalbert: I could also find another extension with compiled components for TB [09:43am] mschroeder: Maybe something for the status meeting next week. [09:43am] ctalbert: Tbird that is, not the disease. [09:43am] ctalbert: Yeah, I'll put it on that agenda -- you can mention it to Daniel. (Since I won't be at the meeting) [09:44am] mschroeder: okay [09:45am] ctalbert: I put it on the agenda [09:45am] ctalbert: cool, thanks [09:45am] mschroeder: What extension did you find? [09:45am] ctalbert: I haven't found one yet. [09:46am] ctalbert: I have a meeting with the thunderbird guys tomorrow. If I don't find one today I will ask them tomorrow. [09:46am] mschroeder: perfect [09:46am] ctalbert: Next up is bug 359527 [09:46am] firebot: ctalbert: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=359527 maj, --, ---, nobody@mozilla.org, NEW, start date not considered in creation of recurrence set [09:47am] mschroeder: how many people are on the Tb team... sometimes I have the impression that's only mscott and beinvenu [09:48am] ctalbert: that's about it. I think seth spitzer is also on it and a handful of community folk. I think there is a guy who goes by "standard8" that works on the addressbook functionality [09:48am] ctalbert: Our own dmose was part of that team for a time too, I don't think he's involved with it anymore [09:49am] ctalbert: The same set of QA people that work on firefox work also on thunderbird. That makes everyone double busy [09:50am] mschroeder: i understand [09:53am] ctalbert: I imported Damian's event from bug 359527, and it doesn't show up [09:54am] ulf|away joined the chat room. [09:54am] mschroeder: 5th of Oct was a Sunday and the RRULE is BYDAY=SA [09:54am] ulf|away is now known as ulf. [09:54am] JasnaPaka joined the chat room. [09:54am] ctalbert: ok, I have the ICS importing now. weird hiccup there [09:54am] ctalbert: yeah, there's nothing wrong with this [09:55am] mschroeder: so after reading the RFC I think there shouldn't be an event in the view... the real bug is that it's shown in the unifinder. [09:55am] ctalbert: oh. crap [09:55am] • ctalbert is testing on lightning [09:56am] ctalbert: testing on sunbird.... [09:58am] ctalbert: Yep, the unifinder is wrong. [09:58am] • ctalbert will reopen that bug (I already closed it WFM) [09:59am] ctalbert: nice catch mschroeder [09:59am] firebot: ctalbert@mozilla.com set the Resolution field on bug 359527 to WORKSFORME. [09:59am] firebot: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=359527 maj, --, ---, nobody@mozilla.org, RESO WORKSFORME, start date not considered in creation of recurrence set [09:59am] ctalbert: bug 377041 is next [09:59am] firebot: ctalbert: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=377041 enh, --, ---, nobody@mozilla.org, NEW, Sorting should put tasks without date alway at the bottom [10:00am] ctalbert: mschroeder: about bug 359527, looking at Damian's original post, I think this bug should stay closed [10:01am] ctalbert: He opened it because he didn't understand the spec, it seems. He doesn't mention the unifinder [10:01am] mschroeder: ctalbert: that's true. [10:01am] ctalbert: well, no he does: right at the top [10:02am] ctalbert: I think the fact that it was in the unifinder and not the view confused him [10:02am] mschroeder: ctalbert: I think, there was already a bug about the unifinder behavior. [10:02am] ctalbert: I thought so too. [10:04am] mschroeder: I'll do some research next week. I'll be in Stuttgart over the weekend. [10:04am] ctalbert: ok. I can't find any bugs that reference this issue directly. [10:04am] ctalbert: Bug 377041 is next, I suppose [10:06am] mschroeder: I'll have dinner after that one. [10:07am] ctalbert: Archaeopteryx: ping [10:07am] Archaeopteryx: pong [10:07am] Archaeopteryx: summary: [10:07am] ctalbert: Hi Archaeopteryx, we're trying to decide what to do about bug 377041 [10:08am] Archaeopteryx: users will start creating tasks without dates and tasks the user missed are going at the moment to the bottom. if you have to scroll the task list, you will not recognize it easily [10:09am] Archaeopteryx: for me, tasks without date are long time goals, so at the bottom [10:10am] ctalbert: That's a good motivation for changing the current sorting mechanism. But, I tend to feel that this requires broader discussion. I'd like to get Christian and Mickey's take on this as well. I think we should leave this bug as "New" and start a newsgroup discussion on it. Then use this bug as the vessel for whatever change comes from that. [10:10am] ssitter: tasks without date are sorted as 'now' on purpose currently [10:10am] ctalbert: If they are sorted as "now" then why do they show up at bottom? [10:11am] ssitter: so they will sort between past and future tasks [10:12am] ssitter: also depends if you are sorting ascending or descending [10:12am] Archaeopteryx: yes, and so past tasks (also not finished ones) jump out of view [10:12am] ctalbert: yes, I see this. [10:12am] ssitter: sort the other way around and they will be on top [10:13am] ctalbert: The main reason I was thinking about taking this to the newsgroup is because from the face to face meeting we decided to revisit the entire way we do task handling in the UI. And I think this is an important discussion to have in light of that. [10:13am] ssitter: or should at least if you sort past->future and not future->past [10:13am] ulf: ctalbert: good point [10:14am] Archaeopteryx: this _could_ be a thing where the user should decide [10:15am] ctalbert: iCAL.app has one effective solution to this problem: They have a specific view of tasks where the user can drag and drop the tasks to order them in a user-specific way. [10:15am] ctalbert: I think that would solve the problem [10:15am] ulf: that's really smart [10:16am] ctalbert: I think that's the only feature I like about that application [10:16am] Archaeopteryx: is this sorting saved if the user decides to sort by date and wants to return? [10:17am] ctalbert: yes [10:17am] ctalbert: They are different "views" of tasks, so they are independent [10:17am] ulf: ctalbert: would you mind to make an appropriate note in that rfe to not forget that? [10:17am] ctalbert: sure [10:18am] ulf: cool, thx. [10:18am] ctalbert: Archaeopteryx: would you mind starting a newsgroup thread on this? I think we need to start some discussion on Christian's new task list idea anyway. [10:18am] Archaeopteryx: ok, is this also in the newsgroup or the wiki? [10:21am] ctalbert: Archaeopteryx: I don't see christian's mockup on the wiki [10:21am] ctalbert: Go on and make your post in the newsgroup. [10:21am] Archaeopteryx: ok [10:21am] ctalbert: Ulf: Can you let Christian know about Archaeopteryx's post and see if he has a link to his mockup that he can upload? [10:22am] ulf: sure [10:22am] ctalbert: cool, thank [10:22am] ctalbert: s [10:23am] ctalbert: Ok. so, I think I will remove QA Discussion tag from bug 377041 [10:23am] firebot: ctalbert: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=377041 enh, --, ---, nobody@mozilla.org, NEW, Sorting should put tasks without date alway at the bottom [10:25am] ctalbert: Ok. I think that's about it for the QA Chat. We're about out of time. [10:25am] ctalbert: Does anyone else have anything to bring up? [10:26am] mschroeder: What do we plan for QA after 0.5 release? [10:26am] ctalbert: I think that's a good question. [10:26am] ctalbert: I think looking at some kind of automation might be interesting [10:27am] ctalbert: And I think it would be good to revise our Litmus bugs and organize them a little better. [10:27am] ctalbert: s/bugs/testcases [10:27am] ctalbert: mschroeder: I think that's also a good newsgroup item. Do you have thoughts on it? [10:27am] mschroeder: I think, an overview of code coverage with Litmus & XPCShell unit tests is needed. [10:27am] ctalbert: +1 [10:28am] ctalbert: Why don't I start a NG thread on that too? Bring some more people into the discussion, and then prioritize the ideas of what we want to work on. [10:28am] ctalbert: Personally,I think code coverage should be near or at the top of our list. [10:28am] mschroeder: XPCShell unit tests are quicker in detecting backend bugs if we maintain a good set of test cases. [10:29am] Archaeopteryx: we could also use the wiki for brainstorming like other projects did [10:29am] ctalbert: Archaeopteryx: have a link? [10:29am] ctalbert: mschroeder: yes, I think any automation strategy should start there. [10:30am] ctalbert: Especially since our GUI is about to change drastically with Mickey and Christian's lightning work. [10:30am] Archaeopteryx: http://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Feature_Brainstorming but change to Calendar/QA_Brainstorming [10:30am] ctalbert: I just wanted to see how the brainstorming worked on the wiki. [10:30am] • ctalbert looks [10:31am] ctalbert: I like that idea, Archaeopteryx [10:32am] Archaeopteryx: the people write on the topic they want and some project people organize the ideas in pages or file bugs on it to track it [10:32am] ctalbert: Makes it a bit more trackable than a wandering newsgroup post. [10:32am] ctalbert: But I'll post on the NG and the blog to get discussion started [10:34am] ctalbert: Ok. Let's end the QA Chat here, so that you folks in Europe can get to dinner [10:34am] ctalbert: Thanks very much for the good discussion! [10:34am] ctalbert: Watch the NG and the blog and we'll start a good post-0.5 discussion [10:36am] mschroeder: ctalbert: last quick question... is there something new about the reorganization of the QA section on the wiki? I remember there was something like that brought up in the F2F-Meeting QA discussion. [10:36am] ctalbert: Nothing new as far as I know. [10:37am] ctalbert: mschroeder: Jay has started QMO: http://quality.mozilla.org [10:37am] mschroeder: ctalbert: I looked at it some weeks ago. [10:37am] ctalbert: It's not ready for Community use yet (we're still testing it with firefox content) but eventually we may want to move some/all of our content there. [10:38am] ctalbert: The idea is that it will be a one-stop shop for all things related to mozilla QA [10:38am] ctalbert: (both community and Firefox) [10:39am] ctalbert: But, our wiki page still (in my opinion) could be better organized. But, I haven't any ideas on how to do that. [10:39am] ctalbert: I'm the one that created the current mess, so maybe I shouldn't be allowed to participate in the reorganization [10:39am] mschroeder: [10:41am] ctalbert: I think I will mention that also in the posts about our post-0.5 plans. Maybe there are some web design gurus out there that would like to help out in re-organizing it for us. [10:41am] ctalbert: Unless someone else would like to head up that effort....... [10:42am] ctalbert: Ok. I'll mention it in the posting.
