Difference between revisions of "CWS Checklist for QA responsibilities"

Revision as of 06:27, 27 April 2007

It is very difficult to identify all Activities which are needed to approve a CWS in a high quality. So it is very easy to oversee small items, which can be followed easily by a Regression in the Master (MWS) builds. To avoid such kind of Regressions this list of Action Items should help.

Step 1 : Check common CWS requirement (Checklist in flowchart of 'CWS Workflow for QA-Representative)'

Check if release target of CWS is set correctly.

Check the status of the tinderbox in the Environment Information System. Is the status red the CWS has to go back to development.

Check right adjustment of due dates (plan at least an average of 5 working days for testing in QA).

Build version should not be too old compared to the current master.
(e.g. 1-2 build if many CWSs were integrated; 3-5 build if only a few CWSs were integrated - release phase -; last build if important changes were made in this build)

Appropriate information about specific and global risks must be provided, either in the comments section of the EIS status page and/or in one or more QA child tasks.

All issues must have the status 'Resolved/Fixed'

All issues must be assigned to a QA members (except those only developers can verify)

Issues that can only be tested by a developer must have the status 'verified' (set by another developer!)

For all new features a FINAL specification must be existent

For all features and changes a Change-Mail must be existent (see http://www.openoffice.org/servlets/SummarizeList?listName=allfeatures

Issues submitted by developers must provide a test case to ensure appropriate verification.

All required install sets need to be existent (at least one Windows and one Unix/Linux build, whereas both must be a product build).

Step 2 : Check general CWS health (Avoid wasted effort of other stake-holders)

Run required automated test on both product build - Windows and Unix/Linux – (first.bas, topten.bas from framework/first)

Run additional testing on at least one platform (if necessary)

Run additional tests for specific testing areas or Update-Test for specific applications

Evaluate test results against Master Workspace (MWS)

Step 3 : Inform issue owners and wait for feedback

Provide CWS name

Provide CWS location

Provide 'due dates'

Step 4 : Collect and evaluate Feedback

Inform about obstacles in the comments section of the EIS status page

Step 5 : Nominate or reject CWS

If the CWS must be rejected a comment with the reason for the rejection must be inserted in EIS.

Further questions

Questions should be asked and discussed in dev@qa.openoffice.org.

Helpful Links

EIS - automatic guest login - : http://eis.services.openoffice.org/EIS2/GuestLogon

EIS - general user login -  : http://eis.services.openoffice.org/EIS2/Logon

Specification process  : http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Category:Specification