[cle-release-team] Question about Jira workflow

[Neal Caidin]

Hi CLE Release team,

I was going through the Blocker/Critical tickets which need QA - https://jira.sakaiproject.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?mode=hide&requestId=13399

and I noticed that some of the tickets have the option for indicating the issue was Tested, Close with Testing or Start QA (what I would expect). Other issues only had the option to Close or Reopen the issue. RES issues had the option to Close, Tested, or Re-Open.

My hypothesis is that the QA workflow is not the same for all projects?  I looked at https://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/MGT/Sakai+Jira+Guidelines , but nothing like that is mentioned.

Based on looking at samples of tickets, it seems to me that SAK, KNL, SAM, STAT, and POLL use the same workflow (expected workflow) but that MSGCNTR, MSND, LSNBLDR, SHORTULR, SRCH, BLTI, and PRFL use a different workflow. And RES may be using it's own. A couple of example tickets below. KNL behaves as I expect, but not MSGCNTR.


MSGCNTR-683


KNL-955

This is important because at a minimum I need to make sure the QA process and documentation are reflecting reality, and also because we might want to consider rationalizing the processes at some point in the future.

Is my hypothesis correct? If not, why am I seeing the discrepancy in behavior? 

This came up because I was working with a new QA tester this morning to get him started and the first issue he picked to work on was for PRFL and it doesn't have a Start QA button.

Thanks,

Neal Caidin

Sakai CLE Community Coordinator
nealcaidin at sakaifoundation.org
Skype: nealkdin
AIM: ncaidin at aol.com




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/cle-release-team/attachments/20120904/9d28c57f/attachment-0006.html