Hi, everyone. I've written up a very rough draft of instructions for what proven testers should look for: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_proventesters_instruct... I'm not really super happy with the format, I plan to revise it into something less wordy and more functional - 'here's what you should do from Step 1 to Step 5' kind of thing. But I'd just like to make sure everyone's happy with the general direction I'm aiming in, first. I'll post further drafts for comment as I go. thanks!

On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 09:30 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > Hi, everyone. I've written up a very rough draft of instructions for > what proven testers should look for: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_proventesters_instruct... > > I'm not really super happy with the format, I plan to revise it into > something less wordy and more functional - 'here's what you should do > from Step 1 to Step 5' kind of thing. But I'd just like to make sure > everyone's happy with the general direction I'm aiming in, first. I'll > post further drafts for comment as I go. thanks! Here's a second draft, which turns it into more of a 'list of instructions': https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_proventesters_instruct... it still feels a bit mushy and long at the end. Suggestions on how to reformat or rewrite it to be more 'punchy' and less eye-glazey are welcome! Thanks. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test(a)lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

I worked on this draft a bit on my own user-page. Specifically, I wikified some of the links and heavily edited the overview paragraph. I'm not an expert by any means on the proven-testers proposal, so I might have introduced inaccuracies. Here's the link: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Dafrito/Draft_proventesters_instructi...

I wonder if the article would read better by shaping the article around responsibilities directly. Each responsibility might be a separate section. Here's an example: Overview Responsibilities - Find & install updates to test (Explain updates-testing, Bodhi, --enablerepo, etc.) - Ensure minimum required functionality (Explain release criteria, critpath actions) - Investigate problematic updates (Explain techniques?) - Report karma to Bodhi, and Bugzilla if necessary (Explain karma rules)

On the other hand, if it seems like these responsibilities share a lot of information, then the separate sections could instead become bullet points under a 'Responsibilities' section. The shared infomration would then become separate sections: Overview Responsibilities Getting Updates (ways to enable updates-testing) Criteria - release criteria - critpath actions Tools - fedora-easy-karma - bodhi This might be too article-centric. If the goal of the page is to strictly define proven-testers, then a step-by-step outline makes more sense. However, linear instructions imply strict adherence, and there seems to be a lot of flexibility in how proven-testers can/should work. I'd be happy to continue working on this by implementing one of the outlines above on my draft, or by doing something entirely different, too! I just figured I'd throw some ideas out before I got ahead of myself. :)

On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 23:05 -0500, Aaron Faanes wrote: > >> I worked on this draft a bit on my own user-page. Specifically, I >> wikified some of the links and heavily edited the overview paragraph. >> I'm not an expert by any means on the proven-testers proposal, so I >> might have introduced inaccuracies. Here's the link: >> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Dafrito/Draft_proventesters_instructi... > > I definitely think your version is an improvement on mine, thanks very > much. I'd say let's consider this the current working draft for now. > >> I wonder if the article would read better by shaping the article >> around responsibilities directly. Each responsibility might be a >> separate section. Here's an example: >> >> Overview >> Responsibilities >> - Find & install updates to test (Explain updates-testing, Bodhi, >> --enablerepo, etc.) >> - Ensure minimum required functionality (Explain release criteria, >> critpath actions) >> - Investigate problematic updates (Explain techniques?) >> - Report karma to Bodhi, and Bugzilla if necessary (Explain karma rules) > > This seems to be how you've done it in your current draft, and I like > that. > >> On the other hand, if it seems like these responsibilities share a lot >> of information, then the separate sections could instead become bullet >> points under a 'Responsibilities' section. The shared infomration >> would then become separate sections: >> >> Overview >> Responsibilities >> Getting Updates (ways to enable updates-testing) >> Criteria >> - release criteria >> - critpath actions >> Tools >> - fedora-easy-karma >> - bodhi >> >> This might be too article-centric. If the goal of the page is to >> strictly define proven-testers, then a step-by-step outline makes more >> sense. However, linear instructions imply strict adherence, and there >> seems to be a lot of flexibility in how proven-testers can/should >> work. >> >> I'd be happy to continue working on this by implementing one of the >> outlines above on my draft, or by doing something entirely different, >> too! I just figured I'd throw some ideas out before I got ahead of >> myself. :) > > I'm pretty pleased with your current draft, but if you like the second > one better, that's cool too. Or you could draft both and we could pick > which we like. =) I'm kind-of liking the first one better, too. I think it emphasizes the responsibilities more clearly. We might run into an issue if we skim it down too much, but we'll see. :) > I think the 'Investigate & provide feedback' section could be > streamlined a little - with your nicer framework, some of the content is > duplicated or unnecessary and can be trimmed. I agree, that section could use some love. It seems to have a lot of information, though. I sketched out a possible outline: Typical Scenarios - Major bug - Report, vote down - Minor bug - Report, vote up/neutral - Previously reported bug - Confirm, vote accordingly Unusual Scenarios - Unreproducible bug - Unfamiliar package It's possible we'd drop this outline into a separate section from Responsibilities, and just leave the "Investigate" section to briefly describe what needs to be done. >Do you mind if I make some edits to achieve this? Thanks again! Not at all! Go right ahead. You can copy it to yours if you want, or to another page; I don't have a preference. I really appreciate your feedback! I'll try to work on it more tonight, and if not, then definitely tomorrow. -- Aaron Faanes > -- > Adam Williamson > Fedora QA Community Monkey > IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org > http://www.happyassassin.net > > -- > test mailing list > test(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe: > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test >

On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 19:00 -0500, Aaron Faanes wrote: > I believe the proven-testers draft is ready for review. It's grown a > bit more ambitious, but I tried to stay true to the spirit of the > original draft - I did my best to only revise and clarify the content > without affecting its meaning. Still, it requires a look-over by some > knowledgeable folks to weed out inaccuracies, invalid assumptions, > etc. Here's the link: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Dafrito/Draft_proventesters_instructions This looks excellent. > The discussion page asks about some other issues that I ran into, specifically: > * The relationship between critpath actions and release criteria They happen to be similar, but they're separate processes. > * A more exhaustive list of critpath actions > * The future of http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/JoinProvenTesters and > if any content should be exchanged or merged between the two articles. I think we should keep the separate page, and add a simple link to this page, right after "Individuals must must be mentored and approved before becoming proven testers. A proven tester is a member of the proventesters  group.", which reads "If you are interested in becoming a proven tester, please see this page.", where 'this page' is a link to JoinProvenTesters. > * Whether the article should be pushed to wiki/Proven_tester with a > {{Draft}} template. I'd like to do this to encourage contribution, but > that may be premature. Personally I'd be fine with doing that at this point.

> I definitely welcome any edits, corrections, and/or feedback on these > questions and the submitted draft! Thanks very much for your work!

-- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test(a)lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

----- "Aaron Faanes" <dafrito(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester > > Pushed. :) > I just read it all and I like it very much. Easily readable and understandable. Good job.