Reply
Thread Tools
qgil's Avatar
Posts: 3,105 | Thanked: 11,062 times | Joined on Jul 2007 @ Mountain View (CA, USA)
#1
http://wiki.maemo.org/Extras-testing/QA_Checklist

Feedback please. This checklist is common for developers (before promnoting their applications to extras-testing) and betatesters (before giving them farewell to reach Extras).

It would be good to have more specific instructions to measure performace and power management, since sometimes the problems are not obvious specially in only one session or even a couple of days of casual testing.
 

The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to qgil For This Useful Post:
Posts: 388 | Thanked: 838 times | Joined on Sep 2009 @ Finland
#2
http://wiki.maemo.org/Extras-testing

Are the promotion/demotion criteria shown there up-to-date (10 days, karma >=10) ? At least I can't see voting down an app actually resulting in a karma loss of 4. The pages also seem to be a bit redundant.
 
zerojay's Avatar
Posts: 2,669 | Thanked: 2,538 times | Joined on Apr 2007 @ Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
#3
Originally Posted by qgil View Post
http://wiki.maemo.org/Extras-testing/QA_Checklist

Feedback please. This checklist is common for developers (before promnoting their applications to extras-testing) and betatesters (before giving them farewell to reach Extras).

It would be good to have more specific instructions to measure performace and power management, since sometimes the problems are not obvious specially in only one session or even a couple of days of casual testing.
I just want to add the suggestion to use top in Xterm or maybe loadapplet as an easy way to see if an app has gone off the rails and is eating excessive CPU/battery.
 
qgil's Avatar
Posts: 3,105 | Thanked: 11,062 times | Joined on Jul 2007 @ Mountain View (CA, USA)
#4
Originally Posted by hqh View Post
http://wiki.maemo.org/Extras-testing

Are the promotion/demotion criteria shown there up-to-date (10 days, karma >=10) ? At least I can't see voting down an app actually resulting in a karma loss of 4. The pages also seem to be a bit redundant.
Sure the pages are redundant as I had to leave the office right after posting the URL page here. I will continue tomorrow.

But please zerojay & co, mae your aditions directly to the wiki page. Thanks!
 
Posts: 1,224 | Thanked: 1,753 times | Joined on Jul 2007
#5
What is the meaning of this item:

System performance compromised

Running the application visibly affects the performance and responsiveness of the system, either through specific actions or leaving the application open/running during a long period of time.
Does this mean that programs such as Octave are unacceptable for extras?

Any program that uses enough RAM to swap out system components will cause noticeable harm to respnsiveness, unless you make sure all UI related executables (and their libraries and data pages) are locked in RAM.


There is also:
Application icon missing or not visible in the device.
I think there should be an exception for CLI programs.

Last edited by Matan; 2009-10-22 at 14:45.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Matan For This Useful Post:
qgil's Avatar
Posts: 3,105 | Thanked: 11,062 times | Joined on Jul 2007 @ Mountain View (CA, USA)
#6
There must be a way to discern intended from buggy compromises in performance.

One thing is when one app of dedicated use takes a lot of CPU to perform an action understood and desired by the user (render a 3D graph) and another is to have some widget scrolling in such a buggy way that the system becomes sluggish.

And no matter what, Octave just paused in some inactive window should let the system work as usual, 5 minutes same as 5 days after booting the program.

Icon optional for CLI programs sounds reasonable.
 
zerojay's Avatar
Posts: 2,669 | Thanked: 2,538 times | Joined on Apr 2007 @ Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
#7
I think we should provide a standard icon representing the command line that can be used by all CLI applications. Something simple like a zoomed out black screen with a command prompt, for example.
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to zerojay For This Useful Post:
qgil's Avatar
Posts: 3,105 | Thanked: 11,062 times | Joined on Jul 2007 @ Mountain View (CA, USA)
#8
I had forgotten the optification. Please check: http://wiki.maemo.org/Extras-testing...root_partition

Can someone explain in that section how to look whether an installed package is optified or not?
 

The Following User Says Thank You to qgil For This Useful Post:
Andre Klapper's Avatar
Posts: 1,665 | Thanked: 1,646 times | Joined on Jun 2008 @ Praha, Czech Republic
#9
Tero (I think) started dumping his thoughts at http://wiki.maemo.org/Talk:Extras-testing already - would be good to merge them.
__________________
maemo.org Bugmaster
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Andre Klapper For This Useful Post:
qgil's Avatar
Posts: 3,105 | Thanked: 11,062 times | Joined on Jul 2007 @ Mountain View (CA, USA)
#10
Added a section about non-blockers based on comments read from QA testers these days.

http://wiki.maemo.org/Extras-testing...t#Non-blockers
 

The Following User Says Thank You to qgil For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 17:29.