[maemo-developers] Testing nonsense

[From: Henrik Hedberg]

 > 2009/11/3 Till Harbaum <lists at harbaum.org>:

 >> there's another problem with the testing i am facing with gpxview: 
Nonsense ratings.
 >> GPXView got a "thumbs down" for needing lots of porting to match the 
maemo6 gui.
 >> Yes, harmattan! Why the heck should a fremantle program not be 
forwarded to
 >> extras due to the fact that it will be hard to port it to qt (which 
is what that guy
 >> is imho trying to say)?

Aniello Del Sorbo wrote:

 > Well he didn't say he thunbed it down because of what he said in the 
comment.
 >
 > Maybe he thumbed it down for a reason and ALSO commented that it'll be
 > hard to adapt it
 > to Maemo 6 later on.

    The instructions for testers [1] says:

"Whenever you decide to vote an application down, please leave a comment 
describing what issues you found. The best feedback is a bug number, 
since this allow to track and discuss better the problems. Voting thumbs 
down without any explanation doesn't help the developer getting better 
software for you and the end users."

    There is a long list of blockers ("must") for packages that 
developers provide. Why are the instructions for testers just advices 
("please", not even "should").

    I think it should read:

"Whenever you decide to vote an application down, you MUST leave a 
comment describing what issues you found. The best feedback is a bug 
number, since this allow to track and discuss better the problems."

or even better (the commenting feature in packages interface is 
overlapping thing with bugs.maemo.org):

"Whenever you decide to vote an application down, you MUST provide a 
link to a bug report with severity major or higher."

    Actually, I read some early postings about the subject (since 
April). There were many good ideas (like linking into Bugzilla), but for 
some reason we got this separate playground.

    BR,

    Henrik

[1] http://wiki.maemo.org/Extras-testing#Thumbs_Down

-- 
    Henrik Hedberg  -  http://www.henrikhedberg.net/