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.
While I do not question in anyway the requiremnt to prevent uncessary power consumption, I also have the feeling to the power consumption criteria needs a more detailed and precise formulation.
DiskUsage for example polls file system size around every 5 seconds and also does graphical refreshes. I assume that this should be avoided if the application is not active and thus can be seen as blocker. From the developer view however I need a clear definition of "active" in this case. I remember a discussion exactly about this topic in the developer mailing list. I havn't yet time to check if there is now a documentation about that (that does not focus on use Gtk and it will make it right) that possibly should even be linked in this case.
WifiInfo on the other hand also polls network information in the background. user feedback for the N810 showed that battery will last around 2-3 hours in such mode, so polling should be avoided for a deactive application, too, and current behaviour is likely a blocker, too. On the other hand there is a new wardriving mode, that creates sounds if a open network is detected and it is intended to have this on even while the application is not active. So battery drain is a also intended consequence. I hope this will not stop the application from getting into extras in future. I also have no problem to warn the user once about this mode using a module dialog or similar. I just would like to have a clearification of such handling before I upload it to extras-testing and get lost in various upload iterations and discussions :-)
Since power management is a very difficult topic also for the devloper I would suggest to add as much cross reference regarding testing on my own and technical solutions to definition of "active" and similar, perhaps build a wiki page on its own for this topic (which did not exist the last time I looked).
While I do not question in anyway the requiremnt to prevent uncessary power consumption, I also have the feeling to the power consumption criteria needs a more detailed and precise formulation.
Definitely, but you know a lot more than me so please edit the wiki page providing more details. Without fear.
I have been editing the neighbor pages and now the should be no overlaps:
The first half doesn't seem to be a checklist - but an introduction to
"Extras Testing". Testers (and developers) should have short bullet
points - perhaps even a table?
It does seem to be a good document for an *introduction* to QA &
testing, but I wouldn't say it was the checklist itself. Does that
make sense?
Quim, are you still working on these/have a plan or are you happy for someone else to dive in and start refactoring? (Not that it'd be me necessarily, busy weekend and software development is currently taking priority)
Thanks for the reminder!
I put in stubs for testing tools and started waiting for the test tools documentation to come to the wiki. Then got interrupted with something else and put ideas to the talk: page.
The QA Checklist is basically a checklist now, as per Jaffa's request. The rest of the beef has been moved to the Extras-testing page.
I have started adding the very basic hints and pointers to each blocker in the QA Checklist in order to help developers and testers evaluating the quality of the software. I'm not a developer and not even a good tester myself, so please help adding useful details *there*. Thank you!
Hm, I just noticed an interesting loophole. So, while "free" packages in extras-testing have to wait for at least x days and x karma, "non-free" ones can skip the whole QA process and go straight to extras. Is it just me or is something very wrong here?
