QA/Execution/Meetings/2009-02-11: Difference between revisions

QA/Execution/Meetings/2009-02-11 (view source)

Revision as of 16:52, 11 February 2009

1,708 bytes removed , 11 February 2009

m

→‎Discussion Items

Tchung

Confirmed users

6,361

edits

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 = Discussion Items =
-* Financial Institution Testing
+* Financial Institution Testing (henrik)
 ** [https://intranet.mozilla.org/QA:Community_Bank_Testing Internal site]
 ** [https://wiki.mozilla.org/QA#Website_Testing Public site]
@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 * QA [https://intranet.mozilla.org/QA/2009Q1Workweek Q109 Workweek] (marcia) 2/17-2/20
-** What sessions would QAE be interested in?
+** List is pretty full.  Anything else to add?
-*** Session on fennec update ('''jmaher''')
-*** Brainstorming session on how to build community? ('''marcia''')
-*** General overview of web testing, selenium ('''stephend''')
-*** Testdev team update?  Testcase repository?  Litmus redesign proposal ('''talk to ctalbert''')
-*** Project metrics/Code Coverage ('''murali''')
-*** Rating of security bugs (brown bag with lucas/dan, '''tim''' to follow up)
-** [http://quality.mozilla.org/events/2009/feb/18/mozilla-qa-meetup-mt-view  Meetup] 2/18 (marcia)
-*** Agenda topics?  Lightning talk signups?
-*** ''discussion'' - looking for feedback from those that contacted marcia through meetup.  Find out what topics people would like to hear about.  Talk about intro to mozilla qa ('''marcia''').
-*** If anyone has affiliations with other testing groups, evangelize and link back to the QMO post.
 * QMO stuff (marcia)
-** [http://quality.mozilla.org/events/2009/jan/30/ff-31-beta-3-test-week B3 nightly testweek]
-*** ''discussion'' - not much feedback so far about the testweek.  Getting people to log in to #testday throughout the week.
 ** Style Guide/Community Leads
 *** It has become clear that we need to both have a process for promoting people to Community Leads as well as some control over people adding content. Today I noticed that someone had added "It's okay we don't bite" to the Community FAQ - I edited that content out, but we can't just let people add content willy nilly.  There needs to be some sort of review process. One thing that Tomcat mentioned is to have people create bugs and then have a QA team member review + the document just like a patch.
 *** ''discussion'' - should have a vetting process for community members who want admin access.  '''(marcia)''' and '''(tomcat)''' to work on a guide to demonstrate they are behaving properly.
+**** Any update on this?
 *** ''discussion'' - for content issues, should we review what content is posted before allowing it on QMO?   '''(marcia)''' and '''(tomcat)''' to work on a policy guide.
+**** Any update on this?
-* [https://wiki.mozilla.org/QA/TestDay/Schedule#Testday_moderator_Rotation Testweek Rotation] - Each QA member to sign up
-** ''discussion'' - slot in each member into the rotation, and have them be responsible for moderating/organizing the week.   Ask for additional help when needed for that week.   Testdev team should also be on the loop.
-* [http://surveys.mozilla.org/?id=17 Localizers survey] and how it affects mozQA (timr)
-** ''discussion'' - broad, first pass on how to get l10n teams to be testing their locales better.  Third party multilingual QA services are helping out.  Doesnt affect mozQA daily activities, but we should look over what areas we can give any QA input to, regarding the survey.
 = Project Updates =