Re: QA group best practice?
On Sat, Jul 26, 2003 at 02:31:17PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> I want to supply a patch to #202416 (developers-reference: mention QA in NMU
> section). So I hunted around to find the list of best practices for QA
> uploads that I could base my update on. But I can't find any. So, I'm
> going to make some up.
Cool, I thought about doing something similar yesterday :)
> Firstly, if this stuff is anywhere I've missed, that has all these sorts of
> things, please apply a sharp *thwap* with a URL.
Actually while browsing to the QA packages I saw so many different
uploads ("QA", "NMU", both version numbering styles) that I thought
that something people can read if they want to NMU a package that
is orphaned would be good.
> * All changelogs should start with an entry "QA Upload".
>
> * Version numbering should be standard maintainer style, not NMU style.
>
> * Ensure that the Maintainer field is set to "Debian QA Group
> <packages@qa.debian.org>".
>
> * Subscribe (at least temporarily) to the PTS list for the package after the
> upload, in case your upload causes severe haemmhoraging.
This doesn't differ from "real" NMUs, does it?
> * Make sure you keep the comments in the BTS up to date. If you're working
> on a fix, say so. If you've got an upload in the pipeline, tag the bug
> pending. This minimises duplicated effort, and keeps a record of work done
> (as such, I think it's better than coordinating on -qa@l.d.o, which was my
> other possible suggestion).
If you just begin working on a patch I would prefer "confirmed".
I would use "pending" only for problems that are fixed but not uploaded.
What to do with the bugs after upload? Should they stay "fixed", since
it is some sort of NMU or should they be closed?
> I'm planning on making a short speil on QA uploads to put into the
> developers' reference to satisfy #202416. I'm more varied about putting the
> full rulebook into the dev-ref. Should we give QA a higher priority by
> putting more about it into DR, or should most of it stay on qa.debian.org?
IMHO there should be something in the ref. At least the version
numbering, the "QA Upload" and the Maintainer should go in. The
PTS subscription is normal NMU stuff and the BTS handling could
also an agreement between the people here.
I've searched in the ref some days ago about QA and I was
astonished how few there is in these documents.
All these things should of course also be mentioned on
http://qa.debian.org/howto.html
Gruesse,
--
*** Frank Lichtenheld <frank@lichtenheld.de> ***
*** http://www.djpig.de/ ***
see also: - http://www.usta.de/
- http://fachschaft.physik.uni-karlsruhe.de/
Reply to: