- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 08:55:45 -0400
- To: ext Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Apr/3/2011 6:31 PM, ext Aryeh Gregor wrote: > On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Arthur Barstow<art.barstow@nokia.com> wrote: >> I'm not sure we need to explicitly designate test suite maintainers. > I'd be okay with not having specific maintainers, but then we need to > figure out some good process for what to do if someone finds a test > bug. With a spec, you can file a bug and the editor gets CCd. The > editor is responsible to fix it, and also has the ability to fix it. > If no one is specifically designated as test maintainer for each spec, > then who has the responsibility and ability to address the bugs? These are good points Aryeh. I was thinking a test suite was more like "group property" but it does make sense to designate one or more persons to be responsible for a test suite. By default, that responsibility should be the spec Editor(s) (and possibly others) and if that is problematic, Charles or I can be designated. This would also address the TBD re "should we create a bugzilla component per test suite" -> yes, each spec will have its own test suite component in Bugzilla (e.g. ProgressEvents-testsuite). I think all of the substantive comments to date only affect the proposed Approval page. I'll notify the list after I've reworked that document to reflect the comments. Thanks again, I think this will result in a simpler and clearer process. -AB
Received on Wednesday, 6 April 2011 12:56:17 UTC