QA 'vote' at the go/no-go meetings

John Dulaney j_dulaney at
Fri May 20 20:17:09 UTC 2011

It has been my understanding that anyone from QA that's present (it happened
I was the only one present for F14 final) can cast the vote (which I did, +1).
If I was wrong in this, then maybe F14 shouldn't have shipped?

I do think that having the meeting as a failsafe is a good idea.

> Hey, all. So, a concern was raised in passing at today's go/no-go
> meeting that we don't have a process to elect or otherwise select
> someone to represent QA at go/no-go meetings; usually myself or jlaska
> will cast QA's 'vote' at this meeting. I'm not sure it makes sense to
> set up a procedure just for this purpose, but what I thought would work
> is this: I've edited the go/no-go meeting wiki page:
> to specify the basis on which QA's 'vote' at this meeting is cast. It's
> really entirely deterministic; there's no discretion involved. If there
> are open unaddressed blockers, we do not approve the candidate for
> release. If there are no open unaddressed blockers, we do approve the
> candidate for release. There's really no wiggle room in this: any reason
> we have to not approve the release should be phrased as a release
> blocking bug in any case. With this in place, it really doesn't matter
> who casts QA's vote, or even if anyone does; QA's position can be
> inferred by anyone who knows how to work a web browser.
> I hope that's acceptable to all! If not, or anyone has ideas for
> improvement, do say so...

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the test mailing list