Leveraging community contribution to Unity Quality

Registered by Didier Roche on 2011-10-27

How can we leverage and easier Unity testing from the community? How make them reporting high quality bugs? How can we make the barrier lower to contribute?

Blueprint information

Martin Pitt
Didier Roche
Didier Roche
Series goal:
Accepted for precise
Milestone target:
milestone icon ubuntu-12.04-beta-1
Started by
Martin Pitt on 2012-03-28
Completed by
Martin Pitt on 2012-03-28

Related branches



Work Items for precise-alpha-1:
[didrocks] Setup tarmac and jenkins machines: DONE
[jibel] Help on this setup giving access to required machines: DONE
[jibel] Publish the documentation. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/AutomatedTesting/UnityAutolandingSetup: DONE
[jibel] Publish testing results to jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com: DONE

Work Items for precise-alpha-2:
[agateau] Look at litmus API and help on the application manual test case: DONE
[didrocks] Write jenkins integration for tarmac automerging in trunk: DONE
[didrocks] Bootstrap the feedback process with the french community: DONE
[didrocks] Ensure that first time a ppa version is run, the tests tools are showed in the launcher, promoted, with the unity test cases only: DONE
[dxteam] Provide some manual test cases: DONE
[didrocks] write acceptance user manual tests for unity: DONE
[didrocks] Convert the existing results/test cases to checkbox: DONE
[didrocks] extract data from result tracker and publish them: DONE
[didrocks] Use parallel builds but still add some build-dep detection and dependency capability to tarmac: DONE

Work Items:
[akgraner] Make some promotion on user test cases once the tools are ready: DONE
[didrocks] Help on the tarmac autopilot integration: DONE
[didrocks] Relax a little bit this bug/test case constraint having a reporting tool to prevent abuses: DONE

Work items for ubuntu-12.04-beta-2:
[didrocks] Add additional tarmac facillity like autoclosing bugs, mandatoring bugs and test cases: DONE

start of a protocol and some toughts needed for the manual test tool:

pitti: there's quite a lot of tools to develop here; would it be any easier to use checkbox, where we already have a lot of infrastructure, and users might already be familiar with it? Or is this more aimed at details tests, such as "now try to move this window over here"?
didrocks: after some discussion, checkbox will be used.


Work Items