|
View:
New views
1 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
|
|
[Building Sakai] "Layers" of QAHello,
Here at the conference, there has been renewed discussion about simplifying and strengthening the QA process. Some of the specifics include cutting maintenance releases directly from the maintenance branch and trying to better harness the power of local QA efforts that are often cyclical. Here's one proposal that I briefly fleshed in a conversation. When Sakai 2.6.0 is released, all existing QA servers should move to running a known revision of the 2.6.x maintenance branch. These servers would be refreshed on a regular (weekly or bi-weekly basis) with another known revision (determined by the QA director) of the same branch. When 2.7 code freeze happens and a 2.7.x branch becomes available, a majority of these QA servers gradually migrate to using this new branch. Eventually, when the alphas/betas/RCs become available, most of the QA servers will be running these tags in anticipation of a release. At least two QA servers would continue to run the 2.6 maintenance branch during the "official" support period after the 2.7 release. Lather, rinse, repeat. I think this approach provides some advantages for the community: 1) Stability and predictability for the QA process. People no longer have to "ramp up" for a specific release. Time can be better spent on testing as issues are fixed in the maintenance branch. Server admins have a predictable schedule for new deployments. Managers may have more flexibility to allow people to work on QA that offers both local and community benefit. 2) Perimeter defense. With this approach, there are multiple layers of QA. When an fix or feature is first committed to a branch, it is picked up within 24 hours on Nightly2. Then with a week or so, ti would appear on the QA servers running the maintenance branch. Finally, it would appear in the various alpha/beta/RC tags later in the cycle. 3) Support. Since QA servers will be running a known revision of the current maintenance branch, important bug and security fixes can be targeted, tested, verified, and communicated more easily. The QA server that are "left behind" assure the necessary testing environment for these fixes against known revisions (we need some more QA servers or existing ones with more capacity to make this part work). Seth _______________________________________________ sakai-dev mailing list sakai-dev@... http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai-dev TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to sakai-dev-unsubscribe@... with a subject of "unsubscribe" |
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |