| 1 |
On 11/05/14 20:54, Tom Wijsman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 11 May 2014 20:34:46 +0300 |
| 3 |
> Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> On 11/05/14 19:51, Jeroen Roovers wrote: |
| 6 |
>>>> 14) "TomWij is improving qa, didn't you notice? ;)". |
| 7 |
>>>> |
| 8 |
>>>> Do people really expect QA to be communicative, be motivated and |
| 9 |
>>>> work? |
| 10 |
>>> Of course we do, but are you sure you're tackling this problem the |
| 11 |
>>> right way? I haven't looked into this, but from your quotations and |
| 12 |
>>> from random comments on IRC I get the sure feeling you are perhaps |
| 13 |
>>> pushing people too hard, or at the least rubbing them the wrong way. |
| 14 |
>>> There is no hierarchy that puts QA above developers - you work with |
| 15 |
>>> volunteers and they are all trying their best to get things fixed, |
| 16 |
>>> even when this isn't immediately obvious to you or when the best |
| 17 |
>>> solution doesn't immediately present itself. And when you decide to |
| 18 |
>>> force issues through policies, you find that you don't actually |
| 19 |
>>> have the resources to do that, unless you are prepared to drive out |
| 20 |
>>> the volunteers you expected to start "fixing" things. Are matters |
| 21 |
>>> of "policy" the carrot or the stick? |
| 22 |
>> exactly what i'm thinking too. thanks, well put! ;) |
| 23 |
> It means that you haven't looked; you can't held such expectations if |
| 24 |
> you talk to the QA team with a fictional prejudgment, it might be well |
| 25 |
> put but that doesn't make it reflect the truth. It are thoughts; that |
| 26 |
> is, until you want to share it with QA what it is that you think about |
| 27 |
> as to make it into our collective knowledge. What is it that you notice? |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
It should have been... |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
"OK, nothing is broken here, nothing for qa@ to do, looks like ssuominen |
| 33 |
did everything for us." |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Instead if you insisted on mangling the issue and shoving the policies |
| 36 |
up in the face, and when |
| 37 |
you were pointed out the major arches leads have given an exception for |
| 38 |
stabilizing packages, |
| 39 |
you didn't apology for the waste of time, instead, you continued with |
| 40 |
mangling the issue futher, |
| 41 |
accomplishing nothing but wasting everyones valuable time. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
- Samuli |
Archives