Re: Many tested apps in Extras-testing are not promoted timely
 

That was me, and semi my bad that it didnt unlock for a promote a few days ago - I downloaded the package and gave it a look a couple of weeks ago, but evidently forgot to actually thumbs-up it afterwards, v13 mentioning it above jogged my memory to do it.

The list of supertesters is at:
https://garage.maemo.org/projects/qatesters

While it's hard to do anything about lazy users who are actually using your application and getting on well with it beyond just keeping prodding them and hoping for the best, it is worth bearing in mind that from a testing squad/supertester point of view you're going to have a harder job getting test votes with an application like yours - As the application isnt standalone and basically requires a dreambox set-top box for the application to do anything, and thus be able to test it properly.
Sadly I don't own one, and I imagine from the lack of votes none of the other testers do either.

Re: Many tested apps in Extras-testing are not promoted timely
 

We're working on making the process a lot easier by integrating it with on-device applications, so no desktop activities, login-logout, package hunting, etc, are needed. As for laziness - you have my special permission to rub that in every time somebody starts ranting that there are not enough apps in Extras or that they are half-baked.

While I agree it's a shame, part of the problem is that it seems to me the package is quite specific - I didn't test it because I was/am under the impression you need to have a specific set-top box, and thus I was unable to test the basic functionality (one of the prime requirements of testing). Add to this the problem that the package has not previously reached Extras (and has a lot less people aware of it than if it did). Thus, let's not mix these two things - the difficulty to find testers of a highly targeted application not currently available in Extras, and the QA process in general. As a guy with a moustache said once - we have to find a solution that is as simple as possible, but no simpler than that :)

Super-testers have a (tester) tag in the description - you can see that X-Fade has such a tag, too - but you need 3 guys with that tag if you want to pass on super-tester votes (even super-testers can make mistakes :) ).

Re: Many tested apps in Extras-testing are not promoted timely
 

To have this resolved, please vote here (yes, more votes can help)

https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11045

Also, D-livil, send this link to those complaining so they can resolve their problem, too. Plus, I will personally slap everyone around with a trout on the next Summit who complains there are too many packages in Extras (I mean... seriously ?).

Re: Many tested apps in Extras-testing are not promoted timely
 

Thanks a lot for the reply nidO and attila77. Good to hear that there are improvements comming. :)

Testing the functionality is a good point. But in the end we have the QA process to get no harmful or dangerous, unoptied or applications with missing bucktracker links to the extra repros. In my opinion this are all testable things with my application. So don't be afraid. :)

They are very important and they should be tested faithful. I don't want a app that fills up my root-FS or mess my contacts with the calendar. Because of this I only ask users whats about voting, but I don't want to prodding them all the time. I'm afraid that they could only vote for the sake of peace and quiet. (no one want's this situation and I saw such things at the games section - the ecstatic userbase seems to vote at some games totally blindly only to get faster a shiny new game at extras)

Functionality test should also be done. But for my application in the end I'm sure no one are able to make a 100% functionality test. It supports different kind of receivers (I updated my signature to let you all know) and I'm sure no one owns all of them. I own myself only a single receiver. The rest I integrated with help from people who has asked for support. They have done the testing for me with their devices. Sadly, only several from those have also voted at extra-testing for a earlier version. From one I got a email, asking how it works cos his talk account is not working at the package site. After I had explained it he hasen't created one. A other guy complained about a dependency problem, but it was only a misunderstanding about the version number for Qt and PyQt. After several hours of reading and checking (I'm a beginner hence I have a lot to learn) and solving this confusion I finally asked him: How about voting now? I never heard anything from him. :(

Sometimes the functional test is in its entirety not possible. Sometimes it could be enought to test the starting of a app, is the setting screen working, are the data properly stored, are there no privacy problems and the QA system has to trust that the rest of the app works. In my case it is only a small part untestable. If you don't have such a special kind of receiver at the other end of your network connection you got simply a red dot at the network info symbol instead of a green one. Thats all.

The ovi store makes no kind of functionality testing: Cube Touch! And I'm sure the other, dangerous, criteria are also handled in a lax way.
In some cases it should be enough to test all criteria that could damage a other device, mess up with data or send private content to the CIA or Joseph Stalin.

But I will stop now. Its getting a little bit offtopic. In my opinion the not working promoting from testing to extras is a minor problem.

What is the reason for Khertan to not longer upload his great applications to extras? (I used his pygtkeditor a lot during my development)

EDIT:
Conclusion: I like more the Idea to let a professional, skilled tester look for problems with my application without the possibility of a 100% functionality test instead of forcing 9 clueless community members to vote for my package and in the end to promote it, with my final (own) 10th vote, to extras.

Re: Many tested apps in Extras-testing are not promoted timely
 

ian_r suggested a theme category at the tail end of the "package categories" discussion, but no one responded. His comment may have come too late.

Or perhaps there were just so few themes pre-Fremantle that no one saw the need.

Re: Many tested apps in Extras-testing are not promoted timely
 

Do you know why for example this package does not get removed?
It is thumbed down by the maintainer.
http://maemo.org/packages/package_in...flame/2.0.0.1/
Maybe the 3 super tester votes block it? Is it a bug?

Re: Many tested apps in Extras-testing are not promoted timely
 

Apparently a bug - I have contacted X-Fade and now the package(s) have been removed.

Re: Many tested apps in Extras-testing are not promoted timely
 

Brilliant.
To give a bit statistics, at the moment there are 18/193 (9%) in Extras-testing are in status "Promotion unlocked, waiting for maintainter to promote". This is quite a good progress from yesterday (44/122).
But maybe even 1 app not promoted or demoted is too much?

BTW: The Brainstorm has 9 positive votes. One more is needed to start voting on the solutions.

Re: Many tested apps in Extras-testing are not promoted timely
 

I've not followwed this thread but I just fell victim to this problem for the first time.

I didn't want to promote immediately after getting the email because last time someone complained in the window between promoting and taking the time to add a screenshot to the downloads page about there not being a screenshot. I meant to promote within 12 hours but somehow lost track.

To help with adding a screenshot or anything else for the downloads page is why I'm voting for a super tester to promote the package.

EDIT: Small correction: I got the promotion email at below 10 thumbs up and it error'ed when promoting. Unsure which part was the bug (since there had been talk at one point of super-testers bypassing the 10 vote rule) but never got around to filing it. I then didn't know when I hit 10 votes and could promote.

Re: Many tested apps in Extras-testing are not promoted timely
 

Now you can vote for the different solutions.
I added a fourth solution: To send a weekly email reminder to the maintainer, that the package is ready for promotion.
Maybe it is just that simple?