Re: PEAR-QA: Lets get started!

I think the QA team is a necessity, I'd like to volunteer Regards, Aidan (Australia) "Davey" <davey@php.net> wrote in message news:20040518130259.10154.qmail@pb1.pair.com... > Dear pears, > > Whilst discussing the fate of XML_Tree with lukas and helgi on IRC, > I asked what steps would be needed for my patches to be applied and/or > for me to be added as a lead on the package. > > Apparently, this is what happens: > > > If any major QA issues are found in any package and the QA team doesn't have permission to change that package without contacting the lead first then the QA team will file a bug report. Any major issues can stay open for 2 weeks (5+5+4 days; see below), QA may fix it themselves. > > If the issue isn't fixed within 5 days QA will email the maintainers about the issue (if the bug system won't have auto bug report notices every X week in the future) and if the problem isn't fixed with in 5 days, from that QA will send yet another email to the maintainers and if no answer nor fix to the problem is provided with in 4 days, all members of the core QA team will have permission to modify any file needed to fix that QA issue as well as make a new release. > > > > The same time frames apply when the QA team want to make a release because of unreleased fixes/improvements which are only available via CVS, or when the QA team wants to determine if a package has been orphaned (using the time frames specified for non major issues). > > > > Orphaned Packages > > The QA team can use the above stated rules to determine if a package is orphaned. The core QA team gets lead rights on all orphaned packages until the original maintainer returns or a new maintainer is found. > > So, there I was, pointing out that these criteria are met and that > something should be done... at which point, lukas duly pointed out that > for that to happen, we need an actual QA team... thats where this mail > comes in... > > > How the initial members are chosen: > > If there are more applicants than seats, there should be an open election, where everyone may cast as many votes as there are seats (only 1 vote may be cast per candidate). Of course, if there are less people than seats, all may be accepted and the remaining seats can be filled by QA group vote. Once the core team is formed all further team members can be voted in as per the rules stated below. > > > > There will be a QA core team with a limited number (no more than 7, with the pear group this should give a sufficient amount of people with enough karma that can react to bad releases) people with extended "core-QA-karma". In order for the QA core team to react quickly, the core QA team should be spread out across all time zones as good as possible. This rather small number should empower the QA team sufficiently to handle issues but doesn't trivialize access rights. > > We need to put this into motion now if we actually want a QA team before > the year is out... > > > - Davey