[Fedora QA] #268: asking to join the proven testers and requesting a mentor

Wed Jan 11 12:00:48 UTC 2012

#268: asking to join the proven testers and requesting a mentor
------------------------------------------+-----------------
  Reporter:  arifiauo                     |      Owner:
      Type:  proventester request         |     Status:  new
  Priority:  major                        |  Milestone:
 Component:  Proventester Mentor Request  |    Version:
Resolution:                               |   Keywords:
Blocked By:                               |   Blocking:
------------------------------------------+-----------------

Comment (by mcloaked):

 When you originally stated in your first entry to this ticket that "I also
 have read and understand how the process of testing" - I believed that you
 had indeed read the details in the provestester wiki entry at:
 http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester

 In that web page it states:

 "Feedback procedures

 Since a proven tester's karma determines whether an update is allowed to
 be promoted, they follow special procedures based on the severity of
 regressions they encounter. Use Fedora Easy Karma - see the page for
 instructions on installing and using this tool - to list all installed
 packages from the updates-testing repository and allow to file feedback on
 each one at a time. Note that you can use the parameter --critpath-only,
 which will cause f-e-k to list only unapproved critical path updates, if
 you are short on time for testing. If you do not use this parameter, pay
 particular attention to updates whose description notes that they are
 critical path updates.

 Positive feedback
 Usually, you will be able to post positive feedback on an update. If you
 do not encounter any of the situations below, and find that the update
 passes the tests mentioned above and does not cause you any other
 problems, you should leave positive feedback and note that you were able
 to use the package successfully and did not notice any significant
 problems.

 Major bugs
 If you identified any serious problems in your testing and were able to
 identify the update responsible, post negative feedback for that update.
 If possible, please file a bug report on the problem and link to the bug
 report in your feedback message. A good feedback message quickly and
 clearly identifies the behavior change and the cause, if you were able to
 determine it.

 Minor bugs
 If you identify a problem which is minor in nature and does not impede the
 actual critical path functionality, please do not post negative feedback.
 Post neutral or positive feedback with a note of the issue encountered
 (and a link to a bug report if appropriate).

 Previously reported bugs
 If your testing uncovers no problems but you see that another tester has
 identified a serious problem with the package, please try to replicate
 their problem, and post negative feedback if you are now able to confirm
 it. If you are not able to confirm the problem but you suspect this may be
 because you cannot recreate the necessary conditions, please post neutral
 feedback noting that you were unable to duplicate the problem. Only post
 positive feedback if you are sure your testing indicates the other
 reporter's negative feedback is a mistake.

 Update does not fix a bug it claims to
 If you find an update does not fix a bug it claims to fix, this is not
 usually a case where you should file negative karma. Only file negative
 karma if that is the only change in the update. If an update claims to fix
 five bugs, but only fixes four of them, it is not helpful to post negative
 karma as this may result in the update being rejected, which does not help
 those suffering from the bug that wasn't fixed, and hurts those suffering
 from the bugs that are fixed. When you test an update that claims to fix a
 particular bug and doesn't, but does not have any of the issues listed as
 meriting negative or neutral feedback above, please leave positive
 feedback with a note that the bug in question is not fixed, or neutral
 feedback with such a note if the issue prevents you from otherwise
 properly testing the update.

 Update does not fix a bug it does not claim to
 Please do not leave negative feedback on an update simply because it does
 not fix a bug that also existed prior to the update, and which the update
 does not claim to fix. Doing so serves no purpose: preventing the update
 from being released doesn't help you when the already-released version of
 the package also has the bug. In this case, making it harder for the
 update to be approved only serves to prevent other users from getting the
 fixes for their bugs.

 Unfamiliar packages
 If you are not sure what the component does or how to test it, do not post
 positive or negative feedback. For critical path updates, if the above
 general tests of booting, network functionality and update functionality
 identified no problems, it is fine to leave a neutral feedback message
 noting that you were able to boot the system and perform critical path
 tasks with the update installed. This is generally not useful for non-
 critical path updates, however: please only comment on them if you are
 familiar with the package and able to test it directly."

 Please will you make sure that you indeed have read this properly and
 apply any comments to testing according to these guidelines.

 When you test a package you should install it - and then check whenever
 possible whether any bugs that were reported to be fixed are indeed fixed
 in your own test system.  Please also ensure that you run a package for
 long enough that no new bugs appear in the system after the package has
 been installed.

 It is also useful for some packages to say whether you are using x86 or
 x86_64 since in some cases bugs were only reported for one architecture.
 In general for unfamiliar packages note the guidance that "For critical
 path updates, if the above general tests of booting, network functionality
 and update functionality identified no problems, it is fine to leave a
 neutral feedback message noting that you were able to boot the system and
 perform critical path tasks with the update installed." - on other words
 if you have not done detailed tests but your system runs with no apparent
 regressions then say so and give neutral karma, not +1.

 I think it would be appreciated by testers and developers if you stick
 within these published guidelines, and I am repeating these here as your
 mentor.

 I will look forward to more useful comments and appropriate karma in your
 bodhi comments from now on, and I hope these suggestions will be helpful
 in your further testing as a proventester.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/268#comment:9>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance