[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: QA and the freeze...

On Mon, 14 May 2001, Anthony Towns wrote:

> Hi guys,
> For the freeze to work well, there are two separate QA tasks that need
> to be done: (1) fixing RC bugs before the packages they apply to freeze,
> and (2) improving packages' policy compliance and overall consistency.
> I suspect it might be an idea for people to choose which of those tasks
> they're going to focus on and stick with it for extended periods.
> The first team will need to:
> 	* ensure packages port correctly
> 	* ensure they don't crash the system or delete files or whatever
> 	* have any known security problems fixed
> 	* make sure packages are usable
> 	* make sure they comply with all the really important policy guidelines

* file bug reports for broken dependencies as listed at

A suggestion for the severities of these bugs:
Depends -> grave or serious
Build-Depends -> serious
Recommends -> important (or serious/grave because dselect handles
                         Recommends like Depends?)
Suggests -> normal (but it might be a dependency on a package you have to
                    build yourself in which case it's not a bug)

> Some hints to make the RC bug fixing job a little easier:
> 	* There's no such thing as an unreproducible grave bug. Either it
> 	  breaks for everyone, or it doesn't. If the program is usable for
> 	  most people, it's not completely unusable.

That means when e.g. gcc gives "Internal compiler error" on ARM that's
not RC because it's no problem for most people???

I think you mix two things:
- Unreproducable bugs should be closed.
- You must decide whether a bug that hits only some people should be
  considered RC.
  Something like "if (arch == alpha) do 'rm -rf /* ' " is IMHO
  RC even though it only affects < 5% of our users.

> 	* Serious bugs should be able to cite the "must" in policy that's
> 	  broken. If they can't, it's probably not a serious bug.

And even when you can cite a "must" you can get flames that you mustn't
file bugs...   :-(

> Cheers,
> aj



Nicht weil die Dinge schwierig sind wagen wir sie nicht,
sondern weil wir sie nicht wagen sind sie schwierig.

Reply to: