[WG: Sakai QA] [samigo-team] SAM-973 rested - was Re: [Important] SAM-973 for CLE 2.9.2 ?

Mon Jun 24 11:45:02 PDT 2013

Hi Neal,

I can try to fix it. But am busy with our local issues. If this is not
urgent, can I look into it later?

Thanks,
Karen

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Neal Caidin <neal.caidin at apereo.org> wrote:

> Hi Karen,
>
> We retested SAM-973 and as far as I can tell the verification holds up in
> the GUI. The correct answers have green checkmarks and the incorrect have
> red x's , even after the score update. And the score update remains fine
> too (the overall score for the individual question).
>
> I think the only issue is how the score for an individual FITB (fill in
> the blank) question is distributed in the database. Example: if an FITB has
> 5 items for its answer, the points for the question are 10, and , the
> student gets three right, then that is 6 points -  (10/5) * 3 .  In the
> database, 3 of the questions would show two points each. If the instructor
> overrides the assigned grade to 8 points out of 10, the database stores 1.6
> points per item over all 5 answers, instead of 2.67 points per item over
> the 3 items answered correctly. Does it matter how the points are
> distributed among the items as long as the score for the overall question
> is correct and the display of correct answers is correct?
>
> I assert that if the interface is displaying correctly to the user, then
> it does no matter how the score is distributed in the database for the
> items in one question.
>
> Am I describing the problem correctly? Would you agree that the storage of
> the score across items is not a problem with which to be concerned? Are
> there any APIs that can be affected?
>
> Thanks,
> Neal Caidin
>
> Sakai CLE Community Coordinator
> neal.caidin at apereo.org
> Skype: nealkdin
> AIM: ncaidin at aol.com
>
>
> On May 2, 2013, at 2:04 PM, Karen Tsao <ktsao at stanford.edu> wrote:
>
> Yeah. Maybe we can get it tested again and record the steps.
>
> Thanks,
> Karen
>
>
> On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Neal Caidin <
> nealcaidin at sakaifoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Karen,
>>
>> Maybe I misunderstood then, if it is completely fixed. Perhaps it needs
>> some more testing. My understanding is that the GUI piece was fixed but not
>> the part related to grading Fill in the Blank questions.
>>
>> Should I ask for QA help to retest and document any steps to reproduce
>> problems (if any)?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Neal
>>
>> On May 2, 2013, at 1:02 PM, Karen Tsao <ktsao at stanford.edu> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Neal,
>>
>> Can I know what has not fixed in this JIRA? I thought the issue is fixed?
>> Maybe I miss something?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Karen
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Neal Caidin <
>> nealcaidin at sakaifoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>>> The CLE team did not identify this as one of the issues to get resolved
>>> for RC02 (to be honest, I didn't bring it up based on this thread :-p ).
>>>
>>> But we still have the original quesiton open about whether this should
>>> get merged into 2.9.x (after 2.9.2) and a new ticket opened with Fill in
>>> the Blank grading?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> Neal
>>>
>>> On Apr 30, 2013, at 8:50 PM, Anthony Whyte <arwhyte at umich.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> I see no problem with Neal or the QA team raising potential concerns,
>>> even between release candidates.  We've got a long standing ticket triage
>>> process in place on the release team plus two branch managers with long
>>> experience managing 2.9.x.
>>>
>>> Indeed, I find it both refreshing and encouraging that we can actually
>>> talk of the QA team as an actual entity doing good work.  Like Megan though
>>> I encourage everyone to consider carefully the cost/benefit to the
>>> community of delaying a release in order to pull in just one more
>>> non-blocking fix or a few more like it.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Anth
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 30, 2013, at 8:31 PM, Neal Caidin wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Megan,
>>>
>>> My thought process is one of gathering information, not making
>>> decisions. I think there are enough checks and balances in the process that
>>> hopefully your concerns can be allayed. I see these decisions as ultimately
>>> to be made by the CLE release team, correct?
>>>
>>> You've got a great point and I agree, I would not consider this a
>>> blocker for 2.9.2. Does that mean we should not consider adding it? There
>>> are a few more like this, where a bug fix has been made and verified in
>>> trunk, and it seems like "low hanging fruit" to merge it in and make 2.9.2
>>> even a little better as we head towards rc02. I think rc02 is almost an
>>> inevitable need, btw. I can understand if you are worried about scope
>>> creep.
>>>
>>> I would prefer to bring these different issues up, especially as they
>>> are being brought to my attention by QA testers, and, like I said, gather
>>> information for input to the CLE release team. We can always choose to push
>>> the issues to 2.9.3 and then we will have a jump start having answered some
>>> questions and move some progress on these tickets.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Neal
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 30, 2013, at 4:31 PM, "May, Megan Marie" <mmmay at indiana.edu>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Neal,2****
>>>    I’m really, really, really, really concerned that bugs that are not
>>> flagged as **blockers**  keep being brought up as candidates for
>>> release.****
>>>
>>> SAM-973 has existed since 2.6.3 . . . why isn’t it being flagged for
>>> 2.9.3 like some of the other issues that have been raised? ****
>>>
>>> Megan****
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* samigo-team-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org [mailto:samigo-
>>> team-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org] *On Behalf Of *Neal Caidin
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 30, 2013 4:18 PM
>>> *To:* Samigo Team
>>> *Cc:* sakai-qa at collab.sakaiproject.org QA;
>>> cle-release-team at collab.sakaiproject.org
>>> *Subject:* [samigo-team] [Important] SAM-973 for CLE 2.9.2 ?
>>> *Importance:* High****
>>> ** **
>>> Dear Samigo Team,****
>>> ** **
>>> The QA team reviewed opened Jiras that potentially need to be addressed
>>> for CLE 2.9.2 (and specifically to get into 2.9.2-rc02, release candidate
>>> 02).****
>>> ** **
>>> We have a question/suggestion for
>>> https://jira.sakaiproject.org/browse/SAM-973****
>>> ** **
>>> We believe that SAM-973 is actually two issues. One is a GUI issue which
>>> has been fixed and verified in trunk. The GUI issue was sometimes
>>> displaying incorrect answers as though they were the correct answers (with
>>> green checkmarks). We think that this issue should have the 2.9.x merge
>>> flag set and be merged into 2.9.2-rc02.****
>>> ** **
>>> The other issue in SAM-973 is a problem with grading Fill in the Blank
>>> answers. This does not yet appear to be fixed and may or may not need
>>> additional discussion. For this one we suggest opening a separate ticket.
>>> ****
>>> ** **
>>> Does that make sense to you too? ****
>>> ** **
>>> Thanks!****
>>> ** **
>>> Neal Caidin****
>>>
>>> Sakai CLE Community Coordinator****
>>> nealcaidin at sakaifoundation.org****
>>> Skype: nealkdin****
>>> AIM: ncaidin at aol.com****
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> samigo-team mailing list
>>> samigo-team at collab.sakaiproject.org
>>> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/samigo-team
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> samigo-team mailing list
>>> samigo-team at collab.sakaiproject.org
>>> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/samigo-team
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> samigo-team mailing list
> samigo-team at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/samigo-team
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/sakai-qa/attachments/20130624/ae6c7ce3/attachment-0001.html 