Re: [OM Cooker] Separate qa mailing list, why?!?!

Le ven. 02 ao=C3=BBt 2013 03:31:01 CEST, David Walser a =C3=A9crit :
> On 08/01/2013 09:23 PM, Ben Bullard wrote:
>> On 08/01/2013 07:29 PM, Per =C3=98yvind Karlsen wrote:
>>> 2013/8/2 Ben Bullard <[email protected]
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>>>
>>>     On 08/01/2013 09:21 AM, Per =C3=98yvind Karlsen wrote:
>>>>     worsen communication
>>>     As compared to the high level of communication on this list? :-D
>>>
>>> Touch=C3=A9. ;)
>>>
>>> I was more thinking along the lines of being more difficult to follow
>>> discussions though. :)
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> Per =C3=98yvind
>> I am the person who asked for the list and I asked for it to be privat=
e
>> for members of the QA team to discuss things amongst ourselves without
>> outside noise. It is other people who decided it should be a public
>> list. I still believe it should be private. OM-General and OM-Cooker a=
re
>> more that enough for public discussion. In fact other lists such as
>> OM-council and OM-infra are private. As should, IMOH, be OM-QA.
>
> Just as another point of reference, Mageia also has council, sysadmin
> (infrastructure), and QA mailing lists.  However, I believe they are
> all public.  Obviously private communications can take place off-list
> if things are sensitive, but this is usually not necessary.  The QA
> team actually has two lists, one that receives the bugzilla mails
> assigned to the QA team, and another for discussion.  So this isn't
> unreasonable at all.
>
>> Any QA teams work is ultimately public and should be as is ours. Yet a=
ll
>> organizations at times see a need do do some things privately with a
>> small work group. This is not new. It is not unusual. The 6/24 .iso is=
 a
>> prime example of something that most definitely should have been teste=
d
>> internally before public release. This type of testing can't be done
>> while communicating on a list open to the public. Do any of you actual=
ly
>> believe that Fedora or OpenSuSE release an Alpha .iso without internal
>> QA? I know for a fact that they don't. Hence they both have private
>> channels of communication for various work groups as do many opensourc=
e
>> groups, non-profit, for profit business organizations. Again not only =
is
>> this not unusual it is standard practice.
>
> Fair enough, but I don't really see the need for the *communication*
> to be private.  The way Mageia handles it is the actually ISOs
> themselves, while they are being internally tested by the QA team, are
> available on a password-protected rsync server, and the passwords are
> distributed by private e-mail.  All of the actual communication takes
> place on IRC or an online collaboratively-edited document, both of
> which are public, although it's mostly just QA team members looking at
> this communication.
>

In fact I agree on most points, however most list are open and=20
accessible publicly. Per =C3=98yvind and QA team both are hiring good=20
questions, we need noiseless medium of communications and at the same=20
time we would need a place where we could see who's who and what's the=20
next step for each team.

About Mageia, well they have something better than us which is the=20
double board mailing list, one private, one public.

I asked for our council list to be accessible publicly, but it's true=20
we have to deal with some personal data that have been removed first=20
and need to clean it before opening to public (but it's still work to=20
do, and we still lack manpower)

Mageia has also a big advantage (which is in other way a disadvantage),=20
most of people leading it live close to each other with the same=20
language, I participated to some part of the kickoff, and it's far far=20
easier to organize things quickly when you don't have to manage a gap=20
of 24h of timezone, from Western USA to New Zealand. They have created=20
a company dedicated to Mageia, and can work on its organization mostly=20
every day.

Most of us are pure volunteer, we live all around the world and have=20
coordinator from every where, as an example TC coordinator from=20
switzerland, QA from US if I'm correct, Infra from India...

But things are moving, things are done (FISL being the last big thing=20
that has been done). Sometimes things are moving slowly, such as infra=20
since, as a simple example, I had to slow my activity on it and focus=20
on global Association management)

--
Best regards, meilleures salutations
Rapha=C3=ABl Jadot