[Sugar-devel] [ASLO] Tech Report
alsroot at activitycentral.org
Wed Mar 9 07:56:24 EST 2011
On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 04:37:24AM -0600, David Farning wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: tabitha.mail at gmail.com [mailto:tabitha.mail at gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> > Tabitha Roder
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 3:42 AM
> > To: David Farning
> > Cc: Aleksey Lim; sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> > Subject: Re: [Sugar-devel] [ASLO] Tech Report
> > On 13 February 2011 16:31, David Farning <dfarning at activitycentral.com>
> > wrote:
> > On the content side, the New Zealand testers would be perfect fit
> > editors. Every weekend they could go through the queue of uploaded
> > activities for the week and approve the one without regressions.
> > There would be a strong incentive for people to fix the bugs the
> > NZTesters report in order have their active moved from the sandbox
> > to public.
> > david
> > We did discuss this a few weeks back and thought we should have some
> > guidelines (these were started on
> > http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Activity_Library/Editors/Policy
> > <http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Activity_Library/Editors/Policy/> ). I liked
> the idea
> > of us tagging things as passing some basic tests.
> > What is the best way for us to see the queue of uploaded activities?
> > Do you want to add me as an editor and we can have a look at what an
> > sees and then come back and ask questions if we need to?
How it happened before:
In fact, the common practice in previous time for ASLO editor for most
of cases was just seeing if newly nominated activity conforms basic
requirements (FOSS licence, source code, inappropriate content) and make
it public or not. The idea was that if people need to collect
information about activities quality, they support collections with (in
recent ASLO version) particular activity versions. But it didn't happen.
It seems that many people want to have/make ASLO workflow more QA
oriented, ie, downgrade public status if activity is not good enough,
make activities public only if it works more or less. For me it is the
question how it might happen, having an analog of commercial AppStores
(ie, making decisions of changing activities status basing on ASLO
editors conclusion) or having [regular] QA per project (ie, ASLO is just
a sharing place w/o any common quality guarantee, only having basic
ones (FOSS, no inappropriate content, etc)).
In any case, we have content maintainer (dirakx), ie, main ASLO editor
who should be aware of current ASLO course in that case.
> > I have a login
> > ASLO site, will I just use that?
> Yes, I added editor and admin access to your account. You can poke around
> the entire site.
Actually, would be better to have only one person who is the last point
of addind/removing ASLO editors, ie, content maintainer (dirakx) :)
More information about the Sugar-devel