![]() |
maemo.org website clarity & organization
|
Re: maemo.org website clarity & organization
On the page:
http://wiki.maemo.org/Extras-testing/QA_Checklist The checkbox template for blockers entry at #6 "Optification ok" seems to have been revised from an earlier use of "Too much memory used in root partition" from the explanations later in the page. If this is the case, the later heading of "Too much memory used in root partition" should be revised to "Optification OK" so that it the description is apparent in its relation, and the information can be used by the reader in QA.. |
Re: maemo.org website clarity & organization
On the page
http://wiki.maemo.org/Extras-testing/QA_Checklist Relation of the later descriptions and checks for the earlier listed blockers is torturous to correspond with the blockers themselves. If the blockers in the checklist are enumerated, then the later descriptions should be preceded by the same number at the beginning of a section on that particular blocker so that the reference is plain. Example: "1." before "Lack of bug reporting database", "2." before "Licensing and legal issues", etc. |
Re: maemo.org website clarity & organization
On the page
http://wiki.maemo.org/Extras-testing/QA_Checklist Lack of clarity Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: maemo.org website clarity & organization
On the page
http://wiki.maemo.org/Extras-testing/QA_Checklist Loss of utility for testing procedure Example; "Too much memory used in root partition" This is an instance of an instructional page becoming vague or changing its focus to design philosophy. The contents of the page should be algorithjic, not narrative. In this section, abandoning additional explanations of "why" and "how" and replacing them explicitly with testing procedure would make it useful for readers to test. There is now no information there besides mentioning dpkg as a tool for listing files - not how it is relevant, or what results should be looked for. Excursions into the links there lead only to more design philosophy, not testing procedure. A useful entry would have an algorithmic sequence of tool to use how to apply it interpretataion of result repeat for any additional tools This type of information would also be appropriate for other sections, such as "Power management issues" and "System performance compromised", even if the only tool is observation. The tool should be specified, the possible results specified, and the results which relate to testing pass/fail specified. |
Re: maemo.org website clarity & organization
Volunteer wiki editors welcome. ;)
|
Re: maemo.org website clarity & organization
I'll gladly volunteer, but like other things, I can't figure out how.
Also, others will need to address http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p=896364&postcount=5 I have not yet penetrated the swamp between here & how-to. |
Re: maemo.org website clarity & organization
If I might add my own private annoyance with a website detail here:
CSS on non-IE browsers Could someone with a notepad editor and access to the maemo server files set the max-width of the content area to something more reasonable and flexible? I just sent a private message and the end of my lines just disappear into oblivion over to the right side of the content area. But itīs not just private messages. Other forum areas have that same problem too. I know max-width isnīt supported by MS, but all decent browser do and for IE width should be enough as well. Line/word wrapping might be helpfull here too... This has been annoying me for some time now and itīs really, really easy to fix :D Thank you. * Bows. Nods head. Waves goodbye now * |
Re: maemo.org website clarity & organization
Quote:
|
Re: maemo.org website clarity & organization
Quote:
Dave. |
Re: maemo.org website clarity & organization
Hi rotoflex,
Quote:
A "blocker" is "a bug which blocks the package from being promoted to Extras" - as such, only serious problems should block packages. These problems should cover filesystem corruption & systemic overuse, excessive power consumption in normal operation, legal issues, lack of a community reporting mechanism, and any non-edge-case crasher bugs. I personally disagree with the "blocker" list on 2 points: not all crashers or incomplete features should be blockers, IMHO - if an application crashes when some unusual set of circumstances happens, then it should still get promoted; and I don't think we should be policing "missing announced features". So if you would like to update the lead-in paragraph to elaborate on what is meant by a blocker, then I would be delighted! Just log in, click on the edit link beside the paragraph, and update. Everything is version controlled, so you have a safety net to roll back if you are unhappy with the result. Good luck! Dave. |
Re: maemo.org website clarity & organization
Hi,
Quote:
First stop: our getting started in the wiki page, linked to whenever you edit a page: http://wiki.maemo.org/Contributing_to_the_wiki You have a simple but multi-step process to follow to get on the first step:
You can also edit the wiki anonymously, if you know how to do simple additions. I hope this helps you get started! Cheers, Dave. |
Re: maemo.org website clarity & organization
Quote:
|
Re: maemo.org website clarity & organization
Quote:
Agreed. Just pointing out that I don't agree with all the things we consider blockers (and am on the record as saying that the extras-testing process places too much of a burden on app developers & packagers). Just my opinion, of course. Dave. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 21:36. |
vBulletin® Version 3.8.8