re-doing the QA part of "join-fedora"

[Jerry Amundson]

On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Leam Hall <leam at reuel.net> wrote:
> Michael Cronenworth wrote:
>>>
>>> Daumas, I think I hit your concerns about expectations and have the basic
>>> idea for documenting bodhi, koji, eieio...
>>>
>>
>> Do we really need a Stream Liaison in the QA team? Should that role be in
>> another Fedora group?
>>
>> What about people that wish to download packages from updates-testing and
>> make sure they don't destroy the system (ex: dbus updates)? I would like to
>> fill such a role.
>>
>> The other roles look fine to me, but I'm just a newb.
>>
>
> Stream Liason is a reality check. My real goal would be an openness in QA
> that lets us assimilate feedback from the user community and NOT require QA
> to test every bloody thing under the sun before the GA date is hit.
>
> For example, if we have some finite community who really really really likes
> TWM on PPC as their window manager then they can really really really help
> by making sure THEY test it. Someone from that community could interact with
> QA if TWM on PPC broke and that person/group could act as Stream Liason.
> They would get the quickest updates, and would work into the system and be
> able to articulate their community needs and Fedora's progress
> bi-directionally.

As another example, the (hypothetical) Stream Liason for X.org would,
upon learning of the pending change to the very useful, non-harmful
de-facto standard Ctrl-Alt-Backspace feature, communicate to upstream
a strongly worded statement against it.

Depending on the result, as representative of Fedora that he/she is,
the SL can then either thank upstream for reversing the change and
commend them for such understanding, or he/she can begin organizing
the vigilante mob and plan the public lynching. Ahem, again speaking
hypothetically, of course...

jerry