[WG: Sakai QA] URGENT - Sakai-2.6.0-rc01/rc02 - Update - 4/28/09

[Pete Peterson]

Greetings,

UPDATES

1)      Sakai-2.6.0-rc02: we will be cutting the RC02 tag on Wednesday April 29th, 2009. This tag contains fixes for:

a.        SAK-16185<http://bugs.sakaiproject.org/jira/browse/SAK-16185>

b.      SAK-16205<http://bugs.sakaiproject.org/jira/browse/SAK-16205>/SAK-14215<http://bugs.sakaiproject.org/jira/browse/SAK-14215>


2)      Feedback/discussion request: KNL-164<http://bugs.sakaiproject.org/jira/browse/KNL-164>/SAK-16146<http://bugs.sakaiproject.org/jira/browse/SAK-16146>: initially we had hoped to address this as part of the RC02 release, but after review by Jim Eng of the K1 team it appears the problem is more complicated than expected, addressing the issue will take some time and testing will involve several use cases:



*         converting to filesystem storage in a DB with XML serialization

*         converting to filesystem storage in a DB with BINARY_ENTITY serialization

*         converting to filesystem storage in a DB with partial conversion to BINARY_ENTITY serialization



See KNL-164<http://bugs.sakaiproject.org/jira/browse/KNL-164> for more details.


Jim also notes that the immediate impact is low as it affects only those system administrators who want to stop storing resource bodies in the database and start storing them in the file system.  This of  course is unfortunate but he recommends against holding up the release in order to include this fix.

OPTIONS
There are several options that we can pursue:

*         Proceed with RC02 and scheduled release of 2.6.0 and leave KNL-164<http://bugs.sakaiproject.org/jira/browse/KNL-164>/SAK-16146<http://bugs.sakaiproject.org/jira/browse/SAK-16146> for Sakai 2.6.1 maintenance release.

*         Delay the release of Sakai 2.6.0 until the can be applied in an RC03 and release. Recommend 2.6.0-rc02 as the interim release.

Thanks in advance for all your help,

Pete Peterson
QA Director, Sakai Foundation
plpeterson at ucdavis.edu
Phone: +1-530-754-7259


-------------------------------------------

Greetings,

The 2.6.0-rc01tag has been released and is installed on several QA servers already, see  the QA Test Servers<http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/confluence/display/QA/Test+instances> page for the complete list.  Many of you have been testing this for quite some time and now we are very near to a full release. With that in mind I hope you can muster one more QA surge and help us really put this release to the test.

Here is the information to get started:

QA Checklist and Release Schedule

*         2.6.0 Release Changes - This site has the list of jiras related to new functionality and features in 2.6.0. testing results can be reviewed here as well.

*         Sakai 2.6.0 Release<http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/confluence/display/REL/Sakai+2.6> - this page shows the status of the release and related links to documentation.

Things to remember

*         Sakai Jira Guidelines<http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/confluence/display/MGT/Sakai+Jira+Guidelines> -  good information on all Sakai reporting including QA

*         Report findings on the confluence reporting pages. Brief and clear is perfect, with a reference to the jira or module as needed, e.g.; SAK-XXXXX verified.

*         If you come across a "new" bug do the following:

o   Search jira for an existing or similar bug

o   Create a new jira entry for the bug

o   Annotate the confluence page to reflect your findings

QA Reporting Lexicon (new)
I would like to suggest adopting a standard lexicon of QA terms to be used in jiras and when report results. The following are suggested terminology and definitions:

*         QA SUMMARY - summary of testing plan, OS tested, instance tested on, browser, etc.

*         QA RESULTS - detailed results on the testing

*         QA UFO - Unexpected Functional Oddity: strange anomalies that are not bugs, but perhaps should be addressed or investigated

*         QA VERIFIED - Issues is verified and passes QA, comments

*         QA UNVERIFIED -could not verify because it is not testable or failed QA, comments

Example:
QA SUMMARY
* Sakai QA Network qa5-us (svn tags/sakai-2.6.0-rc01) using Oracle - Built: 12/23/08 22:18 - Sakai sakai-2.6.0-rc01 - Server: tartar, QS: MS Vista, Browser: Firefox and IE7
QA RESULTS
* Fix performed as expected...
QA VERIFIED
* Passed QA testing



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/sakai-qa/attachments/20090428/0103d2a1/attachment-0001.html