Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
25 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

Parul Mathur
Hi community members,

The Mozilla Quality Assurance team is looking for feedback regarding its
website http://quality.mozilla.org (QMO).

1. What do you expect to see when you go to QMO? Are your expectations met?
2. What does QMO do well?
3. What can QMO do better?
4. What is completely missing from QMO but should be there?

We got some feedback on the Community Building mailing list:
https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001614.html
https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001637.html

We'd love to have your feedback too!

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Thanks,
Parul
(Mozilla Community Member)
IRC nick pragmatic on #qa
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

Parul Mathur
This is the feedback we have received so far on the Community Building
mailing list [hidden email]
<mailto:[hidden email]>.

---_---

Jayakumar Sadhasivam <iamjayakumars at gmail.com>
Wed Jun 11 19:46:06 PDT 2014

Hi,
As a volunteer I prefer, Event Notification and Better Event Calendar.

Regards,
-Jay


-----------------
Jayakumar Sadhasivam (iamjayakumars)
Mozilla Representative India
iamjayakumars at gmail.com
www.jayakumars.me
@iamjayakumars
fb.com/iamjayakumars

--__--

Gabriela Montagu <gmontagu at gmail.com>
Fri Jun 13 15:50:54 PDT 2014

Hi Parul,

I totally agree with Jayakumar about showing an Events calendar on the
front page of QMO, instead of having to browse to
https://quality.mozilla.org/, then click Events and then Calendar to know
about the week's events. These should be added as soon as they are
scheduled so the community is able to know about them in advance.

In the Teams sites, it would be nice to see a photo of each member (or a
team's one with the names of each one as the Web QA Team has) so you can
know the faces of the people you are contributing with. Long ago I remember
there were photos but not now. I think Contributors would be more keen on
contributing if they could know them, even only in a photo.

I like the way each team describes their activities and the information
about how to help in each one is great. I think it would be good to show
the team member's email address, as in the Mobile Team site. This may help
contributors to email some of the members directly instead of signing up to
a mailing list, to obtain more personalized help about how to contribute.
Some people prefer a more person to person contact. I remember I contacted
some Mozilla people this way a long time ago and it was a very rich
experience!

I've just discovered the Docs site, I think it's AWESOME!!! Having so much
information in one site is great!!!

Parul, I hope you'll find this helpful. Any doubts or questions, please
don't hesitate contacting me!!!!


Many thanks!
Best regards,
Gabriela
Responsi​ble QA Mozilla Hispano


http://www.mozilla-hispano.org
http://twitter.com/mozilla_hispano
http://facebook.com/mozillahispano

--__--


Jayakumar Sadhasivam <iamjayakumars at gmail.com>
Fri Jun 13 21:22:50 PDT 2014

Hi,
other suggestion.

    - Most of the New and regular volunteer love to go with Testday rather
    than WebQA, Bug Verification Day and other.  Pin the "Next Testday with
    Date(*Next Testday Jun13, 2014 - Firefox Desktop Beta 31*)" in Home
    Page, attracts more user. Most of the time testday are not aware.
Just two
    line not more details about the testday.

    - Easy way to adding the events to the calendar(Google, Apple, Lighting
    and others), rather than downloading.

    - Showing the volunteer name or Badges for QA.

Regards,
-Jay



-----------------
Jayakumar Sadhasivam (iamjayakumars)
Mozilla Representative India
iamjayakumars at gmail.com
www.jayakumars.me
@iamjayakumars
fb.com/iamjayakumars


--__--

Ashickur Rahman <ashickur.noor at gmail.com>
Fri Jun 13 21:35:06 PDT 2014

Jay's points are good. My suggestion,

    - We can write a blog of how to start at QMO, for the new contributor.
    And pin it on the home page.

----------------------------------------------------------
Dedicated Linux Forum in Bangladesh <http://goo.gl/238Ck>
2048R/89C932E1 <http://goo.gl/TkP5U>
Mozilla Reps <http://reps.mozilla.org>, Mozilla Bangladesh
+880-1611151550, +880-1551151550

--__--


Aaron Train <atrain at mozilla.com>
Fri Jun 13 14:33:24 PDT 2014

Hello,

I noticed that there is a feedback request for QMO posted on the
community-building mailing list[1].

There are many things wrong and bad with QMO. This email will largely
just list points that I feel are bad with QMO in no particular order.
There is far and few between any good on QMO. It’s been like this for
years because it hasn’t ever been treated as a higher tier important
mozilla based website. It feels like a neglected stepchild.

What is the purpose of QMO? Are we even addressing that purpose? If it’s
the entrance and welcoming spot for our community, then we are doing a
bad job.

As I see it right now, QMO lacks any cohesion, core relevant data and is
essentially a test-day announcement site. It’s a site that non of us
like using because it based on a Wordpress platform. There is little
extensibility and room for improvement and extensibility as we’re at the
mercy of the platform.

When I visit QMO, front-and centre is ‘the latest news’ which is
essentially listing *future events* which have been primarily test-day
even notices. Off the bat, we should be providing the upcoming events
*first* and future event notices elsewhere.

The are no reference to One and Done, Moztrap nor Firefox OS on the
front-page. There is no call to help on the front-page.

The teams that are defined on QMO do not make sense. Why is there an
automation team button, but in it I see WebQA. Is there no automation in
desktop Firefox?

Mobile QA only makes reference to Android and not Firefox OS. What
purpose do these team pages serve?

There is a confusing yet useless login on the top right which serves no
useful purpose. What is the login even for?

Whatever docs that are relevant should not live on QMO, they should be
on MDN. They are not searchable and undiscoverable if they live on QMO.

These are just some of the issues I have with QMO and have had for many
years with this site. I want it to be useful, I really do think it
deserves web developer attention and shouldn’t be left alone. It should
feel like the other Mozilla web properties.

‘How I Can Help Test” is reduced to a small link on the right side
amongst a cluster of other links.

The community tab just redundantly lists front-page events. What purpose
does the community tab serve?

tl;dr

I really do think that QMO needs to be trashed and completely re-done
based on a new framework that allows for extensibility based on ideas we
want to do with it. WordPress is too limiting. The idea of QMO needs to
be redefined and the more important bits of information need to be
better displayed.

Other/Nits:

Nit: The entire look and feel of QMO is using a Firefox 3.5 theme which
is from 2009.
Other: There is a broken careers button which has been broken for years
on the right side. Can we get that removed?
Other: We make no mention of our open QA meeting on Wednesdays, see
https://qa.ubuntu.com/ for inspiration on how they do it
Other: There is no mobile optimization whatsoever

[1]
https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001614.html

Aaron Train
Sr. QA Engineer
Mozilla Corporation
https://quality.mozilla.org



--- Original Message ---
*From:* Parul Mathur <[hidden email]>
*Subject:* Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 18, 2014 11:13 AM PST
*To:* Dev-quality <mailto:[hidden email]>

> Hi community members,
>
> The Mozilla Quality Assurance team is looking for feedback regarding
> its website http://quality.mozilla.org (QMO).
>
> 1. What do you expect to see when you go to QMO? Are your expectations
> met?
> 2. What does QMO do well?
> 3. What can QMO do better?
> 4. What is completely missing from QMO but should be there?
>
> We got some feedback on the Community Building mailing list:
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001614.html 
>
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001637.html 
>
>
> We'd love to have your feedback too!
>
> Looking forward to hearing from you.
>
> Thanks,
> Parul
> (Mozilla Community Member)
> IRC nick pragmatic on #qa
> _______________________________________________
> dev-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality

_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

AaronMT
In reply to this post by Parul Mathur
On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 4:55:37 PM UTC-4, Parul Mathur wrote:

> This is the feedback we have received so far on the Community Building
>
> mailing list [hidden email]
>
> <mailto:[hidden email]>.
>
>
>
> ---_---
>
>
>
> Jayakumar Sadhasivam <iamjayakumars at gmail.com>
>
> Wed Jun 11 19:46:06 PDT 2014
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> As a volunteer I prefer, Event Notification and Better Event Calendar.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> -Jay
>
>
>
>
>
> -----------------
>
> Jayakumar Sadhasivam (iamjayakumars)
>
> Mozilla Representative India
>
> iamjayakumars at gmail.com
>
> www.jayakumars.me
>
> @iamjayakumars
>
> fb.com/iamjayakumars
>
>
>
> --__--
>
>
>
> Gabriela Montagu <gmontagu at gmail.com>
>
> Fri Jun 13 15:50:54 PDT 2014
>
>
>
> Hi Parul,
>
>
>
> I totally agree with Jayakumar about showing an Events calendar on the
>
> front page of QMO, instead of having to browse to
>
> https://quality.mozilla.org/, then click Events and then Calendar to know
>
> about the week's events. These should be added as soon as they are
>
> scheduled so the community is able to know about them in advance.
>
>
>
> In the Teams sites, it would be nice to see a photo of each member (or a
>
> team's one with the names of each one as the Web QA Team has) so you can
>
> know the faces of the people you are contributing with. Long ago I remember
>
> there were photos but not now. I think Contributors would be more keen on
>
> contributing if they could know them, even only in a photo.
>
>
>
> I like the way each team describes their activities and the information
>
> about how to help in each one is great. I think it would be good to show
>
> the team member's email address, as in the Mobile Team site. This may help
>
> contributors to email some of the members directly instead of signing up to
>
> a mailing list, to obtain more personalized help about how to contribute.
>
> Some people prefer a more person to person contact. I remember I contacted
>
> some Mozilla people this way a long time ago and it was a very rich
>
> experience!
>
>
>
> I've just discovered the Docs site, I think it's AWESOME!!! Having so much
>
> information in one site is great!!!
>
>
>
> Parul, I hope you'll find this helpful. Any doubts or questions, please
>
> don't hesitate contacting me!!!!
>
>
>
>
>
> Many thanks!
>
> Best regards,
>
> Gabriela
>
> Responsible QA Mozilla Hispano
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.mozilla-hispano.org
>
> http://twitter.com/mozilla_hispano
>
> http://facebook.com/mozillahispano
>
>
>
> --__--
>
>
>
>
>
> Jayakumar Sadhasivam <iamjayakumars at gmail.com>
>
> Fri Jun 13 21:22:50 PDT 2014
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> other suggestion.
>
>
>
>     - Most of the New and regular volunteer love to go with Testday rather
>
>     than WebQA, Bug Verification Day and other.  Pin the "Next Testday with
>
>     Date(*Next Testday Jun13, 2014 - Firefox Desktop Beta 31*)" in Home
>
>     Page, attracts more user. Most of the time testday are not aware.
>
> Just two
>
>     line not more details about the testday.
>
>
>
>     - Easy way to adding the events to the calendar(Google, Apple, Lighting
>
>     and others), rather than downloading.
>
>
>
>     - Showing the volunteer name or Badges for QA.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> -Jay
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----------------
>
> Jayakumar Sadhasivam (iamjayakumars)
>
> Mozilla Representative India
>
> iamjayakumars at gmail.com
>
> www.jayakumars.me
>
> @iamjayakumars
>
> fb.com/iamjayakumars
>
>
>
>
>
> --__--
>
>
>
> Ashickur Rahman <ashickur.noor at gmail.com>
>
> Fri Jun 13 21:35:06 PDT 2014
>
>
>
> Jay's points are good. My suggestion,
>
>
>
>     - We can write a blog of how to start at QMO, for the new contributor.
>
>     And pin it on the home page.
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Dedicated Linux Forum in Bangladesh <http://goo.gl/238Ck>
>
> 2048R/89C932E1 <http://goo.gl/TkP5U>
>
> Mozilla Reps <http://reps.mozilla.org>, Mozilla Bangladesh
>
> +880-1611151550, +880-1551151550
>
>
>
> --__--
>
>
>
>
>
> Aaron Train <atrain at mozilla.com>
>
> Fri Jun 13 14:33:24 PDT 2014
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> I noticed that there is a feedback request for QMO posted on the
>
> community-building mailing list[1].
>
>
>
> There are many things wrong and bad with QMO. This email will largely
>
> just list points that I feel are bad with QMO in no particular order.
>
> There is far and few between any good on QMO. It's been like this for
>
> years because it hasn't ever been treated as a higher tier important
>
> mozilla based website. It feels like a neglected stepchild.
>
>
>
> What is the purpose of QMO? Are we even addressing that purpose? If it's
>
> the entrance and welcoming spot for our community, then we are doing a
>
> bad job.
>
>
>
> As I see it right now, QMO lacks any cohesion, core relevant data and is
>
> essentially a test-day announcement site. It's a site that non of us
>
> like using because it based on a Wordpress platform. There is little
>
> extensibility and room for improvement and extensibility as we're at the
>
> mercy of the platform.
>
>
>
> When I visit QMO, front-and centre is 'the latest news' which is
>
> essentially listing *future events* which have been primarily test-day
>
> even notices. Off the bat, we should be providing the upcoming events
>
> *first* and future event notices elsewhere.
>
>
>
> The are no reference to One and Done, Moztrap nor Firefox OS on the
>
> front-page. There is no call to help on the front-page.
>
>
>
> The teams that are defined on QMO do not make sense. Why is there an
>
> automation team button, but in it I see WebQA. Is there no automation in
>
> desktop Firefox?
>
>
>
> Mobile QA only makes reference to Android and not Firefox OS. What
>
> purpose do these team pages serve?
>
>
>
> There is a confusing yet useless login on the top right which serves no
>
> useful purpose. What is the login even for?
>
>
>
> Whatever docs that are relevant should not live on QMO, they should be
>
> on MDN. They are not searchable and undiscoverable if they live on QMO.
>
>
>
> These are just some of the issues I have with QMO and have had for many
>
> years with this site. I want it to be useful, I really do think it
>
> deserves web developer attention and shouldn't be left alone. It should
>
> feel like the other Mozilla web properties.
>
>
>
> 'How I Can Help Test" is reduced to a small link on the right side
>
> amongst a cluster of other links.
>
>
>
> The community tab just redundantly lists front-page events. What purpose
>
> does the community tab serve?
>
>
>
> tl;dr
>
>
>
> I really do think that QMO needs to be trashed and completely re-done
>
> based on a new framework that allows for extensibility based on ideas we
>
> want to do with it. WordPress is too limiting. The idea of QMO needs to
>
> be redefined and the more important bits of information need to be
>
> better displayed.
>
>
>
> Other/Nits:
>
>
>
> Nit: The entire look and feel of QMO is using a Firefox 3.5 theme which
>
> is from 2009.
>
> Other: There is a broken careers button which has been broken for years
>
> on the right side. Can we get that removed?
>
> Other: We make no mention of our open QA meeting on Wednesdays, see
>
> https://qa.ubuntu.com/ for inspiration on how they do it
>
> Other: There is no mobile optimization whatsoever
>
>
>
> [1]
>
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001614.html
>
>
>
> Aaron Train
>
> Sr. QA Engineer
>
> Mozilla Corporation
>
> https://quality.mozilla.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
> *From:* Parul Mathur <[hidden email]>
>
> *Subject:* Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)
>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 18, 2014 11:13 AM PST
>
> *To:* Dev-quality <mailto:[hidden email]>
>
> > Hi community members,
>
> >
>
> > The Mozilla Quality Assurance team is looking for feedback regarding
>
> > its website http://quality.mozilla.org (QMO).
>
> >
>
> > 1. What do you expect to see when you go to QMO? Are your expectations
>
> > met?
>
> > 2. What does QMO do well?
>
> > 3. What can QMO do better?
>
> > 4. What is completely missing from QMO but should be there?
>
> >
>
> > We got some feedback on the Community Building mailing list:
>
> > https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001614.html 
>
> >
>
> > https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001637.html 
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > We'd love to have your feedback too!
>
> >
>
> > Looking forward to hearing from you.
>
> >
>
> > Thanks,
>
> > Parul
>
> > (Mozilla Community Member)
>
> > IRC nick pragmatic on #qa
>
> > _______________________________________________
>
> > dev-quality mailing list
>
> > [hidden email]
>
> > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality

I just want to call out (re-reading my post) that I didn't at all mean to demean any past or current efforts of working on QMO.
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

Francesca Ciceri
In reply to this post by Parul Mathur
Hi,

thanks Parul for starting this discussion! I honestly think that QMO
could use some love :)
I'm pretty new as contributor - I've started a couple of months ago -
but I had to rely more on the wiki and MDN than QMO for documentation
on QA.
Here I'm assuming that the target of QMO is a prospective contributor,
and that the main purpose of the site is to explain what the QA work
is and how it's structured for the different products in Mozilla, to
give some directions on how to start, to give pointers to more
advanced documentation, to promote the upcoming events.

I pretty much think this is the whole point behind QMO, but feel free
to correct me if it isn't (ie: if it's more of a team website for
internal use or something like that).

On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:13:57AM -0700, Parul Mathur wrote:
> 1. What do you expect to see when you go to QMO?

As said above, I think it should have:

- a section explaining what the qa work is and how is structured in
  Mozilla

- clear directions on how to start, depending on your skills/interests

- pointers to more advanced documentation (on wiki, or MDN)

- promoting of upcoming events


> Are your expectations met?

For what I can see, QMO already *has* all this stuff: it's just IMVHO
not well organized, nor easy to browse if you don't know where to look
for stuff.
Both the design and the organization of the site seem slightly
confusing to me (but that can be just me!).

For instance: the home page shows the most recent posts, which are mainly
related to the events. And that's ok. But we should remember that the visitor
maybe doesn't have any prior knowledge about what (Mozilla) QA is, or how to start
contributing, so an header with a blurb on that could be useful.
Sort of a presentation, an "hello! this is the home of Mozilla QA:
the teams doing quality assurance on all Mozilla products. Take a look
at <link> our teams or check out <link> how you can help, or you can
check our <link> upcoming events. Want to learn more? Look our <link>
videos and <link> documentation."
This way, the user have a easy compass to navigate the site.

The page, visually, is a bit overwhelming: the most important tool for
navigate the site (the navigation tabs) is more or less  crushed
by the teams list just below it.
Which, IMO is not that useful: it's not very likely that a new
contributor will know what "Automation" or "Services
QA" are, so there's no much point to a direct link from the
homepage. After all, if you want to go directly to the teams page you
can use the "Teams" tab in the navigation bar. Having both is redundant.

On a side and totally unrelated note, I find the teams icons adorable
especially the Mobile one: kudos to whoever created them! :)

Also: "The Home of Mozilla QA" and "Get Involved!" just above the teams
icons are a bit confusing in their use of colors (at first I thought
that the green "get involved" title was a link).

Others have already mentioned that, but the login box is confusing as
well.

> 2. What does QMO do well?

I think the events part is well mantained and structured. I like the
Video section (and I just discovered it!), and it could probably use some
love in terms of a better categorization of the video listed.
I like also the fact that the various teams inside the QA ecosystem are
listed, so that you can understand all the different parts of the work
that's going on.
And, finally, I think the Docs section - while probably in need of a
general review (for sometimes links seem to run in circles, and also
sometimes overlap wiki or mdn docs) and a better visual listing, is
good.


> 3. What can QMO do better?

As said, an overall well thought re-organization of the structure and
the presentation of the content would be great IMO.
An idea could be to identify tasks with a difficulty rating
in mind, and then organize all the site using that rating.
For instance: entry level contribution, intermediate, advanced, expert.
And for entry level choose some tasks, the related docs, the related
videos, the related events. And you can obviously do it in two ways:
 
 - adding a visual marker for each difficulty, and maintain the current
   main level structure of the site, so that - let's say - in the Events
   section the bug triaging days have one star out of five, because
   they're easier than the verification days. And the tasks associated
   with the Automation team are tagged as advanced because the tools
   used there involve some experience in coding and stuff.

 - organize the site per-profile of contribution: having in mind both
   the easy to difficult scale, and the coding vs non-coding
   contributor profile. This, though, will work only if the site is used
   for the sole purpose of entry point for contributors, and not for
   other purposes (like showcase of what the teams are doing, or
   internal references and docs, etc)


> 4. What is completely missing from QMO but should be there?

I don't think something is actually missing. As said above, I think it's
just a matter of re-organization. And a bit of proofreading for
consistency throughout the site.

I do realize that the site is the result of many people work and I'm
grateful for it, so please take this as constructive criticism: it
was written with that intention (and I was hopefully able to convey it)!

Hope this helps,
Francesca

--
"Zombies don't kill: they recruit"
Braids, dementia summoner
(Zombie Assassin card, Odyssey set, Magic: The Gathering)

_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality

signature.asc (853 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

Liz Henry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 6/19/14 9:41 AM, Francesca Ciceri wrote:

> As said above, I think it should have:
>
> - a section explaining what the qa work is and how is structured
> in Mozilla - clear directions on how to start, depending on your
> skills/interests - pointers to more advanced documentation (on
> wiki, or MDN) - promoting of upcoming events
>

I agree! In fact I think we should remove a lot of what is on QMO and
simplify what's there, moving all documentation to MDN and the wiki.


> An idea could be to identify tasks with a difficulty rating in
> mind, and then organize all the site using that rating. For
> instance: entry level contribution, intermediate, advanced,
> expert. And for entry level choose some tasks, the related docs,
> the related videos, the related events.

I'd say we're going to do this kind of work within One and Done, and
we shouldn't try to duplicate it in QMO.   In fact, I think that
treating QMO as a more or less static website makes the most sense ---
with the exception of blog posts and event announcements.

I also think we may do better to treat the "blog" differently than the
"events announcements/events calendar". Right now they are basically
the same thing, and that doesn't work well. The events plugin we're
using is buggy.

I also think the content we currently have under "community" should in
future become blog posts. Highlight contributors on the blog along
with other posts reporting on events that took place or anything else
newsworthy.



>> 4. What is completely missing from QMO but should be there?
>
> I don't think something is actually missing. As said above, I think
> it's just a matter of re-organization. And a bit of proofreading
> for consistency throughout the site.


I agree here too :)   This is great, detailed feedback, Francesca, and
a really useful overview!



- - lizzard



- --
Liz Henry
[hidden email]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iF4EAREIAAYFAlOjFZEACgkQHxkYXak4ymtwvgD/aP5gdDUhqIDjWvJbr3E3P+Kh
OPGk7Z06QHqKpSrGQ2sBAMoQUbDy1reb9+fidgbXV+UCLIlhjHJDC45386itcDuz
=W0Zg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

Parul Mathur
Hi,

There are probably a lot of people on this mailing list who are involved
in creating content on QMO: writing blog posts, notifying upcoming
events, uploading videos, updating docs, etc.

What do you think of the infrastructure that is in place for doing this?
Is there any room for improvement in this area?

For example, when you publish a blog post do you know how many people
have read it? Do you have an avenue for interacting with your readers?

When you notify an upcoming event, do you know how many people are
interesting in attending it? Do you have an easy way to upload photos or
a report about how the event went?

If you are soliciting community feedback, do you have a way to set up
surveys and analyze the results?

Do you want some other way to interact with community?

Thanks,
Parul
Mozilla Community Member
(IRC nick pragmatic on #qa)
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

rpappalardo
I like the idea of making one-and-done the front door for everyone
coming to the community.  Wherever people find us, it would be great if
we could link them straight to one-and-done to get them directed into
pathways from the get go.  So rather, trying to maintain various
portals, just have the one.  I also think it's important for us to think
more about what people are looking for from us rather than the other way
around.  I'll bet the majority of folks are looking to improve their
technical skills and get experience that is clear and recognizable.  The
more people feel they can successfully accomplish that with us, the more
the word will get out and the more successful we'll be at keeping
community members engaged.

Thank you!
-Richard


On 6/19/14 12:47 PM, Parul Mathur wrote:

> Hi,
>
> There are probably a lot of people on this mailing list who are
> involved in creating content on QMO: writing blog posts, notifying
> upcoming events, uploading videos, updating docs, etc.
>
> What do you think of the infrastructure that is in place for doing
> this? Is there any room for improvement in this area?
>
> For example, when you publish a blog post do you know how many people
> have read it? Do you have an avenue for interacting with your readers?
>
> When you notify an upcoming event, do you know how many people are
> interesting in attending it? Do you have an easy way to upload photos
> or a report about how the event went?
>
> If you are soliciting community feedback, do you have a way to set up
> surveys and analyze the results?
>
> Do you want some other way to interact with community?
>
> Thanks,
> Parul
> Mozilla Community Member
> (IRC nick pragmatic on #qa)
> _______________________________________________
> dev-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality

--
Cloud Services QA
Mozilla Corporation
Phone: 314.374.7249

_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

Marc Schifer
   As others have said, It seems to be that the QMO landing page should be a simple and direct introduction to what QA at Mozilla is. A lot of people have no idea what QA is, much less how to do it.  If I were starting from scratch myself, I'd probably start with short into paragraph immediately followed by an event calendar that not just lists QA events, but also our release schedule.

   I'd also have a nice side bar / check list of introductory links to tutorials, guides to testing and how to write a proper bug.  I'd also move the team link pages below the calendar with a short description of what product(s) each team handles. A prominent  link to One and Done should probably be right under the calendar with a note like, "Can't wait to get started? Here's some things you can try right now!"  Essentially the page should guide them right into participating ASAP without having a lot of clicks or hoops to jump through.

   It would also be neat if we have someway to highlight a Contributor of the Month with a link to their Mozillians profile and a blurb about how they contributed to the project.  

   I also think we should try and keep the landing page as simple as possible, a large wall of text and links can be off putting or overwhelming for many people. Keeping the blog posts/news posts down to a short list of the most recent posts and maybe just show the first few lines with links to expand/or take you to the full article

One thing obviously missing is links to Nightly/Aurora/Beta downloads. These should be very obvious on the page somewhere.

And yes, where is the FxOS team?

Team pages should also have links to highlight any specific events/news/blog posts targeting their projects as well detailed instructions  (Wiki links?) on how to participate in their work. If we had ways to link directly to the One and Done tasks already filtered for that project, that would help guide people easily into the work they are interested in.

TL;DR - Make the landing page a quick entry into the QA world at Mozilla and save the details for deeper pages.

Marc S.
----- Original Message -----
From: "rpappalardo" <[hidden email]>
To: "Parul Mathur" <[hidden email]>, [hidden email]
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 11:53:10 AM
Subject: Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

I like the idea of making one-and-done the front door for everyone
coming to the community.  Wherever people find us, it would be great if
we could link them straight to one-and-done to get them directed into
pathways from the get go.  So rather, trying to maintain various
portals, just have the one.  I also think it's important for us to think
more about what people are looking for from us rather than the other way
around.  I'll bet the majority of folks are looking to improve their
technical skills and get experience that is clear and recognizable.  The
more people feel they can successfully accomplish that with us, the more
the word will get out and the more successful we'll be at keeping
community members engaged.

Thank you!
-Richard


On 6/19/14 12:47 PM, Parul Mathur wrote:

> Hi,
>
> There are probably a lot of people on this mailing list who are
> involved in creating content on QMO: writing blog posts, notifying
> upcoming events, uploading videos, updating docs, etc.
>
> What do you think of the infrastructure that is in place for doing
> this? Is there any room for improvement in this area?
>
> For example, when you publish a blog post do you know how many people
> have read it? Do you have an avenue for interacting with your readers?
>
> When you notify an upcoming event, do you know how many people are
> interesting in attending it? Do you have an easy way to upload photos
> or a report about how the event went?
>
> If you are soliciting community feedback, do you have a way to set up
> surveys and analyze the results?
>
> Do you want some other way to interact with community?
>
> Thanks,
> Parul
> Mozilla Community Member
> (IRC nick pragmatic on #qa)
> _______________________________________________
> dev-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality

--
Cloud Services QA
Mozilla Corporation
Phone: 314.374.7249

_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

Anthony Hughes-3
In reply to this post by Parul Mathur
Parul,

Thank you very much for starting this discussion. I've not yet had time
to fully collect my thoughts on this but I'll try to post my feedback by
early next week.

Sorry for the delay.

Anthony Hughes

On 14-06-18 11:13 AM, Parul Mathur wrote:

> Hi community members,
>
> The Mozilla Quality Assurance team is looking for feedback regarding
> its website http://quality.mozilla.org (QMO).
>
> 1. What do you expect to see when you go to QMO? Are your expectations
> met?
> 2. What does QMO do well?
> 3. What can QMO do better?
> 4. What is completely missing from QMO but should be there?
>
> We got some feedback on the Community Building mailing list:
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001614.html 
>
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001637.html 
>
>
> We'd love to have your feedback too!
>
> Looking forward to hearing from you.
>
> Thanks,
> Parul
> (Mozilla Community Member)
> IRC nick pragmatic on #qa
> _______________________________________________
> dev-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality

--
Anthony Hughes
Senior Test Engineer
Mozilla Corporation

_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

Tony Chung-2
In reply to this post by Marc Schifer
>
> And yes, where is the FxOS team?
>
> Team pages should also have links to highlight any specific events/news/blog posts targeting their projects as well detailed instructions  (Wiki links?) on how to participate in their work. If we had ways to link directly to the One and Done tasks already filtered for that project, that would help guide people easily into the work they are interested in.


Okay, you asked for it!   I just put up a draft of the team and what we do here.   Open for feedback!

Thanks
Tony


On Jun 20, 2014, at 4:14 PM, Marc Schifer <[hidden email]> wrote:

>   As others have said, It seems to be that the QMO landing page should be a simple and direct introduction to what QA at Mozilla is. A lot of people have no idea what QA is, much less how to do it.  If I were starting from scratch myself, I'd probably start with short into paragraph immediately followed by an event calendar that not just lists QA events, but also our release schedule.
>
>   I'd also have a nice side bar / check list of introductory links to tutorials, guides to testing and how to write a proper bug.  I'd also move the team link pages below the calendar with a short description of what product(s) each team handles. A prominent  link to One and Done should probably be right under the calendar with a note like, "Can't wait to get started? Here's some things you can try right now!"  Essentially the page should guide them right into participating ASAP without having a lot of clicks or hoops to jump through.
>
>   It would also be neat if we have someway to highlight a Contributor of the Month with a link to their Mozillians profile and a blurb about how they contributed to the project.  
>
>   I also think we should try and keep the landing page as simple as possible, a large wall of text and links can be off putting or overwhelming for many people. Keeping the blog posts/news posts down to a short list of the most recent posts and maybe just show the first few lines with links to expand/or take you to the full article
>
> One thing obviously missing is links to Nightly/Aurora/Beta downloads. These should be very obvious on the page somewhere.
>
> And yes, where is the FxOS team?
>
> Team pages should also have links to highlight any specific events/news/blog posts targeting their projects as well detailed instructions  (Wiki links?) on how to participate in their work. If we had ways to link directly to the One and Done tasks already filtered for that project, that would help guide people easily into the work they are interested in.
>
> TL;DR - Make the landing page a quick entry into the QA world at Mozilla and save the details for deeper pages.
>
> Marc S.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "rpappalardo" <[hidden email]>
> To: "Parul Mathur" <[hidden email]>, [hidden email]
> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 11:53:10 AM
> Subject: Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)
>
> I like the idea of making one-and-done the front door for everyone
> coming to the community.  Wherever people find us, it would be great if
> we could link them straight to one-and-done to get them directed into
> pathways from the get go.  So rather, trying to maintain various
> portals, just have the one.  I also think it's important for us to think
> more about what people are looking for from us rather than the other way
> around.  I'll bet the majority of folks are looking to improve their
> technical skills and get experience that is clear and recognizable.  The
> more people feel they can successfully accomplish that with us, the more
> the word will get out and the more successful we'll be at keeping
> community members engaged.
>
> Thank you!
> -Richard
>
>
> On 6/19/14 12:47 PM, Parul Mathur wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> There are probably a lot of people on this mailing list who are
>> involved in creating content on QMO: writing blog posts, notifying
>> upcoming events, uploading videos, updating docs, etc.
>>
>> What do you think of the infrastructure that is in place for doing
>> this? Is there any room for improvement in this area?
>>
>> For example, when you publish a blog post do you know how many people
>> have read it? Do you have an avenue for interacting with your readers?
>>
>> When you notify an upcoming event, do you know how many people are
>> interesting in attending it? Do you have an easy way to upload photos
>> or a report about how the event went?
>>
>> If you are soliciting community feedback, do you have a way to set up
>> surveys and analyze the results?
>>
>> Do you want some other way to interact with community?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Parul
>> Mozilla Community Member
>> (IRC nick pragmatic on #qa)
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
>
> --
> Cloud Services QA
> Mozilla Corporation
> Phone: 314.374.7249
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
> _______________________________________________
> dev-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality

_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

Anthony Hughes-3
In reply to this post by Parul Mathur
> 1. What do you expect to see when you go to QMO? Are your expectations met?

I expect QMO to be an entry way to documentation, events, and interactions which help newcomers become involved. I also expect it to be a place where existing community members can assist one another. For the most part these expectations are not fully met.

> 2. What does QMO do well?

I'm not sure I can think of anything that QMO does particularly well. There are certainly things it's adequate for (like documentation) but I wouldn't go as far to say it's currently well suited for anything.

> 3. What can QMO do better?

There are too many account levels. Any vouched Mozillian should be able to add/edit content. User submitted content should be on the front page, not buried under a separate tab. Any Mozillian (vouched or not) should be allowed to interact socially.

> 4. What is completely missing from QMO but should be there?

There's a lot missing from QMO currently. QMO is basically a one-way street. There is no way for contributors to interact with each other. We should find ways to integrate many of our tools into QMO to lower the barriers to entry (IRC, Bugzilla, etc).

In a nutshell, I think our currently implementation of QMO as a documentation repository and event calendar is quite limiting. It should be re-envisioned as a platform for QA collaboration and education.

Anthony Hughes
Senior Test Engineer
Mozilla Corporation


----- Original Message -----

> From: "Parul Mathur" <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 11:13:57 AM
> Subject: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)
>
> Hi community members,
>
> The Mozilla Quality Assurance team is looking for feedback regarding its
> website http://quality.mozilla.org (QMO).
>
> 1. What do you expect to see when you go to QMO? Are your expectations met?
> 2. What does QMO do well?
> 3. What can QMO do better?
> 4. What is completely missing from QMO but should be there?
>
> We got some feedback on the Community Building mailing list:
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001614.html
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001637.html
>
> We'd love to have your feedback too!
>
> Looking forward to hearing from you.
>
> Thanks,
> Parul
> (Mozilla Community Member)
> IRC nick pragmatic on #qa
> _______________________________________________
> dev-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
>
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

Stephen Donner-2
In reply to this post by Parul Mathur
Thanks for kick-starting this discussion back up again, Parul.

My thoughts:

 1. When I'd go to a site like QMO, I'd expect to see information, at a
    high-level about the QA/testing efforts and needs, at Mozilla, and
    the teams (comprised of paid/non-paid community) responsible for
    those particular areas.  I'd also expect recent news (blogs, feeds)
    about testing needs, accomplishments, events, as well new projects
    from development which might need testing.
 2. I think it performs fairly well as a highly-visible blog, and keeps
    folks updated on the latest goings-ons with testdays, in-person
    events/meetups, and -- once you get to the respective team pages --
    for the most part introduces interested community members to the
    teams and some of what we do.
 3. We've tried in various ways, from its genesis,  to be a "portal" to
    all things QA at Mozilla (including the forums, which ended up
    largely being used for product-support requests or highly spammed,
    even with tending and anti-spam measures), and I think we can do a
    whole lot better at: getting interested folk closer to the various
    teams, making the site more inviting and encouraging more/easier
    on-ramping, while making it somehow more dynamic/interactive.
    Sadly, right now the Media page (https://quality.mozilla.org/media/)
    has missing/broken content [1], but it'd be great to update and fill
    that out a bit.  I think we also tried to go for it at one point,
    too, but an up-to-date (and even listing "QA alumni") page listing
    community members and their contributions/areas of focus would be
    great, too (I know we have a bit of that in Mozillians + One and
    Done with profiles, so we'd have to figure out the fit).
 4. I personally would love to see a real-time chat widget of #qa (as
    would satdav, I know), somewhere very prominent, but I believe there
    are still security and/or technical concerns/challenges with doing
    so (at least with WordPress).

- Stephen

[1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1028898

On 6/18/2014 11:13 AM, Parul Mathur wrote:

> Hi community members,
>
> The Mozilla Quality Assurance team is looking for feedback regarding
> its website http://quality.mozilla.org (QMO).
>
> 1. What do you expect to see when you go to QMO? Are your expectations
> met?
> 2. What does QMO do well?
> 3. What can QMO do better?
> 4. What is completely missing from QMO but should be there?
>
> We got some feedback on the Community Building mailing list:
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001614.html 
>
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001637.html 
>
>
> We'd love to have your feedback too!
>
> Looking forward to hearing from you.
>
> Thanks,
> Parul
> (Mozilla Community Member)
> IRC nick pragmatic on #qa
> _______________________________________________
> dev-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality

_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

Edwin Wong
I like to think about the issue with:

* what are the outcomes that the quality organization is looking for with QMO?
* who’s my reader?
* what do I want to communicate to the reader and what action should happen?

I’d like this to be a place for contributors to share about things we’re learning, about why we are passionate about Mozilla products and community.  I’d like it to be a simple and clear way for someone to get involved for short or deeper levels of contribution.

QMO is for:
* those interested in getting involved
* those already in QA wanting to learn and grow around open source testing tools and patterns
* those who want to know more about QA’s purpose

I think we just need to make it easier to publish content. Lower any barriers for the community to write articles or stories.  Ultimately, it QMO is just an extension of all the amazing things that are happening when you build user first software.

-edwin



On Jun 23, 2014, at 3:22 PM, Stephen Donner <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Thanks for kick-starting this discussion back up again, Parul.
>
> My thoughts:
>
> 1. When I'd go to a site like QMO, I'd expect to see information, at a
>   high-level about the QA/testing efforts and needs, at Mozilla, and
>   the teams (comprised of paid/non-paid community) responsible for
>   those particular areas.  I'd also expect recent news (blogs, feeds)
>   about testing needs, accomplishments, events, as well new projects
>   from development which might need testing.
> 2. I think it performs fairly well as a highly-visible blog, and keeps
>   folks updated on the latest goings-ons with testdays, in-person
>   events/meetups, and -- once you get to the respective team pages --
>   for the most part introduces interested community members to the
>   teams and some of what we do.
> 3. We've tried in various ways, from its genesis,  to be a "portal" to
>   all things QA at Mozilla (including the forums, which ended up
>   largely being used for product-support requests or highly spammed,
>   even with tending and anti-spam measures), and I think we can do a
>   whole lot better at: getting interested folk closer to the various
>   teams, making the site more inviting and encouraging more/easier
>   on-ramping, while making it somehow more dynamic/interactive.    Sadly, right now the Media page (https://quality.mozilla.org/media/)
>   has missing/broken content [1], but it'd be great to update and fill
>   that out a bit.  I think we also tried to go for it at one point,
>   too, but an up-to-date (and even listing "QA alumni") page listing
>   community members and their contributions/areas of focus would be
>   great, too (I know we have a bit of that in Mozillians + One and
>   Done with profiles, so we'd have to figure out the fit).
> 4. I personally would love to see a real-time chat widget of #qa (as
>   would satdav, I know), somewhere very prominent, but I believe there
>   are still security and/or technical concerns/challenges with doing
>   so (at least with WordPress).
>
> - Stephen
>
> [1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1028898
>
> On 6/18/2014 11:13 AM, Parul Mathur wrote:
>> Hi community members,
>>
>> The Mozilla Quality Assurance team is looking for feedback regarding its website http://quality.mozilla.org (QMO).
>>
>> 1. What do you expect to see when you go to QMO? Are your expectations met?
>> 2. What does QMO do well?
>> 3. What can QMO do better?
>> 4. What is completely missing from QMO but should be there?
>>
>> We got some feedback on the Community Building mailing list:
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001614.html 
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001637.html 
>>
>> We'd love to have your feedback too!
>>
>> Looking forward to hearing from you.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Parul
>> (Mozilla Community Member)
>> IRC nick pragmatic on #qa
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality

_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality

signature.asc (465 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

Clint Talbert-3
In reply to this post by Parul Mathur
So, QMO came about because we needed a portal. We had no unified
documentation solution, calendaring solution, blog, announcement
service, or task distribution service. QMO aimed to solve all those
things. Like most all-in-one solutions, it did so with varying degrees
of success in each area.

Nowadays, QMO excels at being a very visible web property and blog. It
is our best avenue to reach a large audience and is useful at being a
blog and event announcer.

Mozilla has standardized its documentation solution onto MDN. All the
QMO docs should move to MDN and the QMO versions should be removed. MDN
is well-indexed by google, has a staff of technical writers to help
maintain it, and is documentation central for the entire project.

I agree with Francesca's detailed post that most of QMO's problems are
really around content organization. I think the team pages are useful,
but only as static pages. And those static pages should be subordinate
to the blog content.

The content creation should be easy and open to all active and core
contributors, but subject to review for voice, style, and
applicability--this is QA's channel and QA's voice.

The calendar piece is nice, the feed of upcoming events is useful, but I
hear there is a lot of grumbling and bugs about it. I'd rather we use an
outside service (i.e. google's) than try to fix this ourselves. I also
like the idea of including all the release schedules into the calendar too.

The media tab just seems to contain broken links, and should be
eliminated. I don't think we need a video archive for anything anyway.
If we do, we should look into hosting that on Mozilla's air mozilla
service which is optimized for such things.

So in short, let's focus on what QMO does well, and use standard Mozilla
tools for everything else. Because nowadays, there are standard mozilla
tools for many of the things that QMO once sought to do.

I think we should organize our QMO content around it being a blog, an
event announcer/promoter, a connector to one and done, and a location
for team introduction pages -- in that priority order (highest to lowest).

That's my two cents,
Clint

On 6/18/2014 11:13, Parul Mathur wrote:

> Hi community members,
>
> The Mozilla Quality Assurance team is looking for feedback regarding
> its website http://quality.mozilla.org (QMO).
>
> 1. What do you expect to see when you go to QMO? Are your expectations
> met?
> 2. What does QMO do well?
> 3. What can QMO do better?
> 4. What is completely missing from QMO but should be there?
>
> We got some feedback on the Community Building mailing list:
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001614.html 
>
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001637.html 
>
>
> We'd love to have your feedback too!
>
> Looking forward to hearing from you.
>
> Thanks,
> Parul
> (Mozilla Community Member)
> IRC nick pragmatic on #qa
> _______________________________________________
> dev-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality

_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

Geo Mealer
In reply to this post by Parul Mathur
We've had a number of discussions on this over the years. Here are notes from a couple back in 2012:

March 15, 2012, https://etherpad.mozilla.org/QMO-Evolution
July 17, 2012, https://etherpad.mozilla.org/qmo-redesign

Obviously these are pretty out of date (for example, I'm stumping for a QMO-based web board on them to use instead of dev-quality!) but there are some good thoughts. Others may still have links to other discussions/notes from back then. We certainly talked about QMO a lot.

Re: thoughts, this repeats a bit of what Parul and I discussed in person, but echoing here.

I think a lot of thoughts in this thread are bang on re: what QMO is good at, bad at, how it could be rearranged, etc. Most are in line with each other, and I agree with a large number of them.

For all my opinions of the same types of things, though, what I don't really have a sense of right now is how valuable QMO is. It's good at some stuff, but is it important stuff? Is it the *most* important stuff? Without knowing the value of the site, it's hard to prioritize giving it attention. I suspect that might be why it's fallen by the wayside a bit in general.

So I think we should separate the concepts of purpose vs. execution:

First, we need a list of the N most important purposes for QMO to serve. This should be purely objective, not based on current QMO or anything. Just, what should our website do within the next few months? Aggregate blogs? Educate testers about testing? Introduce people to our communication systems? Play Tetris? (spoilers, probably not Tetris). It won't be everything it could do, maybe just the top 5 or 10 that we can agree are the most important things we need.

Second, we should execute a site that serves those N purposes in a completely focused manner. We should design review against the listed purposes, come to an agreement that the proposed design executes those purposes ideally, then build that.

And if part of the design is not directly serving one of the purposes we've explicitly decided we're tackling, it shouldn't go into the site. Otherwise we might collect features that are "easy" or "neat" but maybe not important. Any time spent on unimportant stuff--both implementing and for our audience--is time not spent on something we care more about.

If, given that design, it turns out we can reuse current code, or want to keep WordPress, great. Maybe once we add in resourcing requirements re: who/how much time it takes to maintain we end up having to tweak the design for more reuse. But ultimately every decision needs to focus on those purposes.

That gets us towards a fully intentional design, which we can more clearly judge for "is it or isn't it valuable?"

Geo

----- Original Message -----

> From: "Parul Mathur" <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 11:13:57 AM
> Subject: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)
>
> Hi community members,
>
> The Mozilla Quality Assurance team is looking for feedback regarding its
> website http://quality.mozilla.org (QMO).
>
> 1. What do you expect to see when you go to QMO? Are your expectations met?
> 2. What does QMO do well?
> 3. What can QMO do better?
> 4. What is completely missing from QMO but should be there?
>
> We got some feedback on the Community Building mailing list:
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001614.html
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001637.html
>
> We'd love to have your feedback too!
>
> Looking forward to hearing from you.
>
> Thanks,
> Parul
> (Mozilla Community Member)
> IRC nick pragmatic on #qa
> _______________________________________________
> dev-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
>
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

Vuyisile Ndlovu
Hi all

I'm cross posting my feedback from the Community Building team mailing list
in case it was missed.
My comments inline:

1. What is the primary purpose of QMO? Does the community see it as a place
where they will be welcomed into the QA team's activities and find out more
about them?

I can attest to the usefulness of QMO. When I first started at
Mozilla, QMO was the first site I
was linked to and it had all the necessary info on how to get involved
and how to contact the relevant QA team. I've only worked with Web QA
and so my comments are based on WebQA related pages on QMO.

The project pages have very clear and easy to follow instructions on
how to get started on manual or automated testing, with links to
project specific pages and github repos. Going through the entire text
of requirements, might be a bit of a bore, especially for a new
contributor who is just starting out in QA.


I believe QMO strives to be a one stop resource for new contributors,
giving them info on the different projects that they can contribute
to, how to get set up and how they can contact the respective QA
teams. I joined QA this way, I saw the site, looked up the webQA team
page and I was good to start.
>
>
> 2. What is the purpose of the team pages? Does the community see them as
a way to find out more about each team and initiate contact with team
members to see how they can get involved?
> https://quality.mozilla.org/teams/
> https://quality.mozilla.org/teams/automation/
> https://quality.mozilla.org/teams/desktop-firefox/
> https://quality.mozilla.org/teams/web-qa/
> https://quality.mozilla.org/teams/thunderbird/
> https://quality.mozilla.org/teams/services/
> https://quality.mozilla.org/teams/mobile/

On the WebQA team page, there's a link to the webqa irc channel and
mailing list.Everytime we receive a "request to contribute" email, its
usually after the person has gone through the team pages. So, I think
that team pages are important and should always have up to date info
about how the teams can be contacted. This should be noted concerning
links to IRC chat rooms: IRC may be new to some and they may find it
challenging to set up, so I think its always best to use a link to a
web based irc service like mibbit.


> 3. Should the "Docs" section be migrated to MDN or does it properly
belong to QMO?
> https://quality.mozilla.org/docs/


Docs should definitely be moved. Only the necessary documents should
be left over on QMO. In my experience, there were many times when I
read the docs, went into a redirection loop and ended up giving up. In
my opinion, only documents that will help the contributor get started
as easily as possible should remain. For example
https://quality.mozilla.org/docs/misc/how-can-i-help-test/

The document is short, does not have many links and is easy to follow.
So documents regarding test case creation, bug writing guidelines,
security testing, checks vs tests etc should all be moved to MDN.

Only docs that give information on how the potential contributor can
start should be left over.
>
>
> 4. Should the "Join Mozilla" link on QMO front page go to a listing of
job openings in the QA team?


To a new contributor, the purpose of the link might not be very clear.
It may give the impression that only mozilla staff can contribute to
the project. If I was a potential contributor who had just read
through the site and clicked on that link, I'd think that only staff
can contribute and that's not good. the link needs to be either
removed or rephrased e.g "Work for mozilla" or "Mozilla jobs",
"careers at mozilla"... or something along those lines.

While I understand that QMO is specifically targetted at QA
contributors, I think there should be a link to mozilla.org/contribute
somewhere. My thinking behind this is that we're trying to get as many
contributors onboarded as possible, so if QA doesn't interest a
particular person, we can at least show them other opportunities at
mozilla that are open to them.

>
>
> 5. What purpose does the "Community" tab serve? What would the community
like to see on this page?
> https://quality.mozilla.org/community/
>
 My understanding of the community tab is that its meant to be a place
where individual contributors who have made a huge impact,
contributors who have helped push the QA objectives forward can get
recognition. Recognition is very Important,especially to volunteer
contributors who want to be appreciated for their work and who want to
feel that their contributions matter. To that end, I think it would be
a good idea to add contributor spotlight and keep it up to date with
information about contributions made by community testers.

An example of how this can be done can be seen at the Reps site:
https://reps.mozilla.org/featured/

If we as the QA team are serious about growing the QA contributor
base, we need better engagement with the community both online and
offine. Reports from QA events can be posted in the community tab and
this could include talks by QA engineers at universities, bug days,
training days etc. I'd like to see more engagement woth the
communitity here in this section.

This is a little off topic but I'd like to see the  Mozilla Reps QA
SIG coming to life. The QA special interest group will task itself
with organising QA events, recruiting and mentoring contributors and
pictures, reports and blogs from such activities could go into the
community tab.

>
>
> 6. Does the community see the following areas as having definite room for
improvement?
>
>   * The entire look and feel of QMO

Like Aaron mentioned, the login feature is deprecated and should be
removed. It creates confusion because new contibutors think that they
*must* have an account on QMO in order to contribute,often leads to
them trying to sign up, failing to do so and then asking in the
mailing list/irc how they can create an account; which is something
that just takes them away from what they are supposed to be doing:
contributing!
 I also feel that this is functionality we don't need.

>   * Viewing the site on mobile screens

I use a mobile device as my primary device to connect to the Internet
and my experience with QMO on mobile has never been good so yes I
think the site needs to have a mobile friendly look.



On 26 June 2014 02:34, Geo Mealer <[hidden email]> wrote:

> We've had a number of discussions on this over the years. Here are notes
> from a couple back in 2012:
>
> March 15, 2012, https://etherpad.mozilla.org/QMO-Evolution
> July 17, 2012, https://etherpad.mozilla.org/qmo-redesign
>
> Obviously these are pretty out of date (for example, I'm stumping for a
> QMO-based web board on them to use instead of dev-quality!) but there are
> some good thoughts. Others may still have links to other discussions/notes
> from back then. We certainly talked about QMO a lot.
>
> Re: thoughts, this repeats a bit of what Parul and I discussed in person,
> but echoing here.
>
> I think a lot of thoughts in this thread are bang on re: what QMO is good
> at, bad at, how it could be rearranged, etc. Most are in line with each
> other, and I agree with a large number of them.
>
> For all my opinions of the same types of things, though, what I don't
> really have a sense of right now is how valuable QMO is. It's good at some
> stuff, but is it important stuff? Is it the *most* important stuff? Without
> knowing the value of the site, it's hard to prioritize giving it attention.
> I suspect that might be why it's fallen by the wayside a bit in general.
>
> So I think we should separate the concepts of purpose vs. execution:
>
> First, we need a list of the N most important purposes for QMO to serve.
> This should be purely objective, not based on current QMO or anything.
> Just, what should our website do within the next few months? Aggregate
> blogs? Educate testers about testing? Introduce people to our communication
> systems? Play Tetris? (spoilers, probably not Tetris). It won't be
> everything it could do, maybe just the top 5 or 10 that we can agree are
> the most important things we need.
>
> Second, we should execute a site that serves those N purposes in a
> completely focused manner. We should design review against the listed
> purposes, come to an agreement that the proposed design executes those
> purposes ideally, then build that.
>
> And if part of the design is not directly serving one of the purposes
> we've explicitly decided we're tackling, it shouldn't go into the site.
> Otherwise we might collect features that are "easy" or "neat" but maybe not
> important. Any time spent on unimportant stuff--both implementing and for
> our audience--is time not spent on something we care more about.
>
> If, given that design, it turns out we can reuse current code, or want to
> keep WordPress, great. Maybe once we add in resourcing requirements re:
> who/how much time it takes to maintain we end up having to tweak the design
> for more reuse. But ultimately every decision needs to focus on those
> purposes.
>
> That gets us towards a fully intentional design, which we can more clearly
> judge for "is it or isn't it valuable?"
>
> Geo
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Parul Mathur" <[hidden email]>
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 11:13:57 AM
> > Subject: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)
> >
> > Hi community members,
> >
> > The Mozilla Quality Assurance team is looking for feedback regarding its
> > website http://quality.mozilla.org (QMO).
> >
> > 1. What do you expect to see when you go to QMO? Are your expectations
> met?
> > 2. What does QMO do well?
> > 3. What can QMO do better?
> > 4. What is completely missing from QMO but should be there?
> >
> > We got some feedback on the Community Building mailing list:
> >
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001614.html
> >
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001637.html
> >
> > We'd love to have your feedback too!
> >
> > Looking forward to hearing from you.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Parul
> > (Mozilla Community Member)
> > IRC nick pragmatic on #qa
> > _______________________________________________
> > dev-quality mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
> >
> _______________________________________________
> dev-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
>



--
Regards

Vuyisile Ndlovu

In God we trust, in everything else, we test....and test again!
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)

Robert Kaiser
In reply to this post by Parul Mathur
Parul Mathur schrieb:
> 3. What can QMO do better?

I think the integration or linking between QMO and One and Done should
be better, for example, if a volunteer should interact with others on
both sites, they should at least use the same login (which could be
solved by QMO moving to Persona) and the user profiles should be
connected somehow.

KaiRo

_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

QA and MozReps

Clint Talbert-3
In reply to this post by Vuyisile Ndlovu
Hi Vuyisile,

I'm intrigued by one of the things you mentioned in your post on QMO, so
I'm starting a new thread about that specifically. You mentioned that
you're interested in getting the MozRep QA Special Interest Group (SIG)
started up. Can you say more about that group, and what you imagine it
will do and achieve? I'd like to know how we can best help you.  I'll
quote that part of your message below.


On 6/26/2014 02:22, Vuyisile Ndlovu wrote:

> If we as the QA team are serious about growing the QA contributor
> base, we need better engagement with the community both online and
> offine. Reports from QA events can be posted in the community tab and
> this could include talks by QA engineers at universities, bug days,
> training days etc. I'd like to see more engagement woth the
> communitity here in this section. This is a little off topic but I'd
> like to see the Mozilla Reps QA SIG coming to life. The QA special
> interest group will task itself with organising QA events, recruiting
> and mentoring contributors and pictures, reports and blogs from such
> activities could go into the community tab.

Thanks for responding to the QMO thread too, by the way.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts.

Cheers,
Clint
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QA and MozReps

Vuyisile Ndlovu
Hi Clint,

My apologies for responding to this late.

The MozRep QA SIG is intended to be a program that empowers Reps with
tools/resources that they'd use to recruit more volunteers into QA.
Mozilla has great training for reps with regard to general community
building but I have strong reason to believe that QA is always
overlooked (or not given enough attention whenever we talk about
contribution opportunities).

Members of the QA SIG would make it their responsibility as Reps to
focus their community building/recruitment efforts towards QA.

There's a wiki page that describes the goals of said group here:

https://wiki.mozilla.org/ReMo/SIGs/QA

I'll just summarise some of the points raised in that page: QA SIG duty:

1. Being online on IRC, ready to answer questions that new ones may
have concerning, setting up environments and getting started etc.

2. Responding to contribute requests in the mailing list.

3. Improve/localise QA Documentation

4. Host/facilitate testing themed events at schools/universities/tech
hubs to encourage contribution to QA efforts

5. Leverage and extend our reach internationally by increasing QA
presence in emerging markets such as Africa, Cuba, South America and
South East Asia.

I'd really like to see this group coming to life. Concerning how best
you can help me, I'd like to know if this is something members of the
QA team would be willing to put aside some of their time towards. For
instance, if this group were to become active, we'd start to see  lots
of new contributors and these would need to be mentored, trained and
assisted in any way.

Secondly, there'll be need for documentation, explaining how team QA
goes about its job in testing the different applications made by
mozilla, how Reps should talk about QA, what QA is and what it's not
etc. For example, I've seen excellent slides
by Marcia
http://www.slideshare.net/mozillamarcia/mozilla-under-the-hood-1257014
and a presentation by David Burns
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAtW8furwr0

.Documentation like this would go a long way in providing information
that the reps could use in their communities.

These are my thoughts

On 02/07/2014, Clint Talbert <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Vuyisile,
>
> I'm intrigued by one of the things you mentioned in your post on QMO, so
> I'm starting a new thread about that specifically. You mentioned that
> you're interested in getting the MozRep QA Special Interest Group (SIG)
> started up. Can you say more about that group, and what you imagine it
> will do and achieve? I'd like to know how we can best help you.  I'll
> quote that part of your message below.
>
>
> On 6/26/2014 02:22, Vuyisile Ndlovu wrote:
>> If we as the QA team are serious about growing the QA contributor
>> base, we need better engagement with the community both online and
>> offine. Reports from QA events can be posted in the community tab and
>> this could include talks by QA engineers at universities, bug days,
>> training days etc. I'd like to see more engagement woth the
>> communitity here in this section. This is a little off topic but I'd
>> like to see the Mozilla Reps QA SIG coming to life. The QA special
>> interest group will task itself with organising QA events, recruiting
>> and mentoring contributors and pictures, reports and blogs from such
>> activities could go into the community tab.
>
> Thanks for responding to the QMO thread too, by the way.
>
> I look forward to hearing your thoughts.
>
> Cheers,
> Clint
>


--
Regards

Vuyisile Ndlovu

In God we trust, in everything else, we test....and test again!
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QA and MozReps

Marcia Knous
Hello Vuyisile - Thanks for your thoughts. We have had previous
discussions with some Reps about the SIG. In some areas it has been
difficult to get enough interest to have someone dedicated in this
role.  I spent some time at the last Reps Council meeting trying to get
some interest in having people help us with events in their area, for
example.

We already have a few people who I believe are functioning in this type
role who are not official Reps - Gabriela Montagu from Mozilla Hispano
is one person that comes to mind. So I don't believe someone has to
necessarily be a Rep to function in this type of role - but if Reps want
to help facilitate recruiting new volunteers and leading QA efforts in
their regional areas this would be great.

Also, I am not sure if you are aware but the recent "beta" MozCamp in
India was about going to a different model of community building - one
in which there would be more a "train the trainers" curriculum.  There
are future "MozCamps" planned, and it is in my court to try to put
together a curriculum that would help empower those in regional areas to
lead QA efforts on their own (Testing events, Gatherings, Moz Coffees,
etc). So there are already some efforts underway to try to get some
better documentation for the community.

I am not sure what time zone you are in, but feel free to join the QA
Champions meeting this Friday - you can definitely share more of your
thoughts at the meeting if you like and we can talk about this more -
https://etherpad.mozilla.org/community-champions-20140711. The Champions
has point people from all the various parts of QA - Desktop, Web QA, FX
OS, FF for Android - and the contribution paths and entry points are all
a bit different depending on the functional area.



> Vuyisile Ndlovu <mailto:[hidden email]>
> July 6, 2014 at 10:44 PM
> Hi Clint,
>
> My apologies for responding to this late.
>
> The MozRep QA SIG is intended to be a program that empowers Reps with
> tools/resources that they'd use to recruit more volunteers into QA.
> Mozilla has great training for reps with regard to general community
> building but I have strong reason to believe that QA is always
> overlooked (or not given enough attention whenever we talk about
> contribution opportunities).
>
> Members of the QA SIG would make it their responsibility as Reps to
> focus their community building/recruitment efforts towards QA.
>
> There's a wiki page that describes the goals of said group here:
>
> https://wiki.mozilla.org/ReMo/SIGs/QA
>
> I'll just summarise some of the points raised in that page: QA SIG duty:
>
> 1. Being online on IRC, ready to answer questions that new ones may
> have concerning, setting up environments and getting started etc.
>
> 2. Responding to contribute requests in the mailing list.
>
> 3. Improve/localise QA Documentation
>
> 4. Host/facilitate testing themed events at schools/universities/tech
> hubs to encourage contribution to QA efforts
>
> 5. Leverage and extend our reach internationally by increasing QA
> presence in emerging markets such as Africa, Cuba, South America and
> South East Asia.
>
> I'd really like to see this group coming to life. Concerning how best
> you can help me, I'd like to know if this is something members of the
> QA team would be willing to put aside some of their time towards. For
> instance, if this group were to become active, we'd start to see lots
> of new contributors and these would need to be mentored, trained and
> assisted in any way.
>
> Secondly, there'll be need for documentation, explaining how team QA
> goes about its job in testing the different applications made by
> mozilla, how Reps should talk about QA, what QA is and what it's not
> etc. For example, I've seen excellent slides
> by Marcia
> http://www.slideshare.net/mozillamarcia/mozilla-under-the-hood-1257014
> and a presentation by David Burns
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAtW8furwr0
>
> .Documentation like this would go a long way in providing information
> that the reps could use in their communities.
>
> These are my thoughts
>
>
> Clint Talbert <mailto:[hidden email]>
> July 1, 2014 at 8:02 PM
> Hi Vuyisile,
>
> I'm intrigued by one of the things you mentioned in your post on QMO,
> so I'm starting a new thread about that specifically. You mentioned
> that you're interested in getting the MozRep QA Special Interest Group
> (SIG) started up. Can you say more about that group, and what you
> imagine it will do and achieve? I'd like to know how we can best help
> you.  I'll quote that part of your message below.
>
>
>
>
> Thanks for responding to the QMO thread too, by the way.
>
> I look forward to hearing your thoughts.
>
> Cheers,
> Clint
> _______________________________________________
> dev-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
> Vuyisile Ndlovu <mailto:[hidden email]>
> June 26, 2014 at 5:22 AM
> Hi all
>
> I'm cross posting my feedback from the Community Building team mailing list
> in case it was missed.
> My comments inline:
>
> 1. What is the primary purpose of QMO? Does the community see it as a place
> where they will be welcomed into the QA team's activities and find out more
> about them?
>
> I can attest to the usefulness of QMO. When I first started at
> Mozilla, QMO was the first site I
> was linked to and it had all the necessary info on how to get involved
> and how to contact the relevant QA team. I've only worked with Web QA
> and so my comments are based on WebQA related pages on QMO.
>
> The project pages have very clear and easy to follow instructions on
> how to get started on manual or automated testing, with links to
> project specific pages and github repos. Going through the entire text
> of requirements, might be a bit of a bore, especially for a new
> contributor who is just starting out in QA.
>
>
> I believe QMO strives to be a one stop resource for new contributors,
> giving them info on the different projects that they can contribute
> to, how to get set up and how they can contact the respective QA
> teams. I joined QA this way, I saw the site, looked up the webQA team
> page and I was good to start.
>> 2. What is the purpose of the team pages? Does the community see them as
> a way to find out more about each team and initiate contact with team
> members to see how they can get involved?
>> https://quality.mozilla.org/teams/
>> https://quality.mozilla.org/teams/automation/
>> https://quality.mozilla.org/teams/desktop-firefox/
>> https://quality.mozilla.org/teams/web-qa/
>> https://quality.mozilla.org/teams/thunderbird/
>> https://quality.mozilla.org/teams/services/
>> https://quality.mozilla.org/teams/mobile/
>
> On the WebQA team page, there's a link to the webqa irc channel and
> mailing list.Everytime we receive a "request to contribute" email, its
> usually after the person has gone through the team pages. So, I think
> that team pages are important and should always have up to date info
> about how the teams can be contacted. This should be noted concerning
> links to IRC chat rooms: IRC may be new to some and they may find it
> challenging to set up, so I think its always best to use a link to a
> web based irc service like mibbit.
>
>
>> 3. Should the "Docs" section be migrated to MDN or does it properly
> belong to QMO?
>> https://quality.mozilla.org/docs/
>
>
> Docs should definitely be moved. Only the necessary documents should
> be left over on QMO. In my experience, there were many times when I
> read the docs, went into a redirection loop and ended up giving up. In
> my opinion, only documents that will help the contributor get started
> as easily as possible should remain. For example
> https://quality.mozilla.org/docs/misc/how-can-i-help-test/
>
> The document is short, does not have many links and is easy to follow.
> So documents regarding test case creation, bug writing guidelines,
> security testing, checks vs tests etc should all be moved to MDN.
>
> Only docs that give information on how the potential contributor can
> start should be left over.
>> 4. Should the "Join Mozilla" link on QMO front page go to a listing of
> job openings in the QA team?
>
>
> To a new contributor, the purpose of the link might not be very clear.
> It may give the impression that only mozilla staff can contribute to
> the project. If I was a potential contributor who had just read
> through the site and clicked on that link, I'd think that only staff
> can contribute and that's not good. the link needs to be either
> removed or rephrased e.g "Work for mozilla" or "Mozilla jobs",
> "careers at mozilla"... or something along those lines.
>
> While I understand that QMO is specifically targetted at QA
> contributors, I think there should be a link to mozilla.org/contribute
> somewhere. My thinking behind this is that we're trying to get as many
> contributors onboarded as possible, so if QA doesn't interest a
> particular person, we can at least show them other opportunities at
> mozilla that are open to them.
>
>> 5. What purpose does the "Community" tab serve? What would the community
> like to see on this page?
>> https://quality.mozilla.org/community/
>>
>   My understanding of the community tab is that its meant to be a place
> where individual contributors who have made a huge impact,
> contributors who have helped push the QA objectives forward can get
> recognition. Recognition is very Important,especially to volunteer
> contributors who want to be appreciated for their work and who want to
> feel that their contributions matter. To that end, I think it would be
> a good idea to add contributor spotlight and keep it up to date with
> information about contributions made by community testers.
>
> An example of how this can be done can be seen at the Reps site:
> https://reps.mozilla.org/featured/
>
> If we as the QA team are serious about growing the QA contributor
> base, we need better engagement with the community both online and
> offine. Reports from QA events can be posted in the community tab and
> this could include talks by QA engineers at universities, bug days,
> training days etc. I'd like to see more engagement woth the
> communitity here in this section.
>
> This is a little off topic but I'd like to see the  Mozilla Reps QA
> SIG coming to life. The QA special interest group will task itself
> with organising QA events, recruiting and mentoring contributors and
> pictures, reports and blogs from such activities could go into the
> community tab.
>
>> 6. Does the community see the following areas as having definite room for
> improvement?
>>    * The entire look and feel of QMO
>
> Like Aaron mentioned, the login feature is deprecated and should be
> removed. It creates confusion because new contibutors think that they
> *must* have an account on QMO in order to contribute,often leads to
> them trying to sign up, failing to do so and then asking in the
> mailing list/irc how they can create an account; which is something
> that just takes them away from what they are supposed to be doing:
> contributing!
>   I also feel that this is functionality we don't need.
>
>>    * Viewing the site on mobile screens
>
> I use a mobile device as my primary device to connect to the Internet
> and my experience with QMO on mobile has never been good so yes I
> think the site needs to have a mobile friendly look.
>
>
>
> On 26 June 2014 02:34, Geo Mealer<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>
>> We've had a number of discussions on this over the years. Here are notes
>> from a couple back in 2012:
>>
>> March 15, 2012, https://etherpad.mozilla.org/QMO-Evolution
>> July 17, 2012, https://etherpad.mozilla.org/qmo-redesign
>>
>> Obviously these are pretty out of date (for example, I'm stumping for a
>> QMO-based web board on them to use instead of dev-quality!) but there are
>> some good thoughts. Others may still have links to other discussions/notes
>> from back then. We certainly talked about QMO a lot.
>>
>> Re: thoughts, this repeats a bit of what Parul and I discussed in person,
>> but echoing here.
>>
>> I think a lot of thoughts in this thread are bang on re: what QMO is good
>> at, bad at, how it could be rearranged, etc. Most are in line with each
>> other, and I agree with a large number of them.
>>
>> For all my opinions of the same types of things, though, what I don't
>> really have a sense of right now is how valuable QMO is. It's good at some
>> stuff, but is it important stuff? Is it the *most* important stuff? Without
>> knowing the value of the site, it's hard to prioritize giving it attention.
>> I suspect that might be why it's fallen by the wayside a bit in general.
>>
>> So I think we should separate the concepts of purpose vs. execution:
>>
>> First, we need a list of the N most important purposes for QMO to serve.
>> This should be purely objective, not based on current QMO or anything.
>> Just, what should our website do within the next few months? Aggregate
>> blogs? Educate testers about testing? Introduce people to our communication
>> systems? Play Tetris? (spoilers, probably not Tetris). It won't be
>> everything it could do, maybe just the top 5 or 10 that we can agree are
>> the most important things we need.
>>
>> Second, we should execute a site that serves those N purposes in a
>> completely focused manner. We should design review against the listed
>> purposes, come to an agreement that the proposed design executes those
>> purposes ideally, then build that.
>>
>> And if part of the design is not directly serving one of the purposes
>> we've explicitly decided we're tackling, it shouldn't go into the site.
>> Otherwise we might collect features that are "easy" or "neat" but maybe not
>> important. Any time spent on unimportant stuff--both implementing and for
>> our audience--is time not spent on something we care more about.
>>
>> If, given that design, it turns out we can reuse current code, or want to
>> keep WordPress, great. Maybe once we add in resourcing requirements re:
>> who/how much time it takes to maintain we end up having to tweak the design
>> for more reuse. But ultimately every decision needs to focus on those
>> purposes.
>>
>> That gets us towards a fully intentional design, which we can more clearly
>> judge for "is it or isn't it valuable?"
>>
>> Geo
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Parul Mathur"<[hidden email]>
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 11:13:57 AM
>>> Subject: Seeking feedback on quality.mozilla.org (QMO)
>>>
>>> Hi community members,
>>>
>>> The Mozilla Quality Assurance team is looking for feedback regarding its
>>> website http://quality.mozilla.org (QMO).
>>>
>>> 1. What do you expect to see when you go to QMO? Are your expectations
>> met?
>>> 2. What does QMO do well?
>>> 3. What can QMO do better?
>>> 4. What is completely missing from QMO but should be there?
>>>
>>> We got some feedback on the Community Building mailing list:
>>>
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001614.html
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001637.html
>>> We'd love to have your feedback too!
>>>
>>> Looking forward to hearing from you.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Parul
>>> (Mozilla Community Member)
>>> IRC nick pragmatic on #qa
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dev-quality mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
>>
>
>
>
> Geo Mealer <mailto:[hidden email]>
> June 25, 2014 at 8:34 PM
> We've had a number of discussions on this over the years. Here are
> notes from a couple back in 2012:
>
> March 15, 2012, https://etherpad.mozilla.org/QMO-Evolution
> July 17, 2012, https://etherpad.mozilla.org/qmo-redesign
>
> Obviously these are pretty out of date (for example, I'm stumping for
> a QMO-based web board on them to use instead of dev-quality!) but
> there are some good thoughts. Others may still have links to other
> discussions/notes from back then. We certainly talked about QMO a lot.
>
> Re: thoughts, this repeats a bit of what Parul and I discussed in
> person, but echoing here.
>
> I think a lot of thoughts in this thread are bang on re: what QMO is
> good at, bad at, how it could be rearranged, etc. Most are in line
> with each other, and I agree with a large number of them.
>
> For all my opinions of the same types of things, though, what I don't
> really have a sense of right now is how valuable QMO is. It's good at
> some stuff, but is it important stuff? Is it the *most* important
> stuff? Without knowing the value of the site, it's hard to prioritize
> giving it attention. I suspect that might be why it's fallen by the
> wayside a bit in general.
>
> So I think we should separate the concepts of purpose vs. execution:
>
> First, we need a list of the N most important purposes for QMO to
> serve. This should be purely objective, not based on current QMO or
> anything. Just, what should our website do within the next few months?
> Aggregate blogs? Educate testers about testing? Introduce people to
> our communication systems? Play Tetris? (spoilers, probably not
> Tetris). It won't be everything it could do, maybe just the top 5 or
> 10 that we can agree are the most important things we need.
>
> Second, we should execute a site that serves those N purposes in a
> completely focused manner. We should design review against the listed
> purposes, come to an agreement that the proposed design executes those
> purposes ideally, then build that.
>
> And if part of the design is not directly serving one of the purposes
> we've explicitly decided we're tackling, it shouldn't go into the
> site. Otherwise we might collect features that are "easy" or "neat"
> but maybe not important. Any time spent on unimportant stuff--both
> implementing and for our audience--is time not spent on something we
> care more about.
>
> If, given that design, it turns out we can reuse current code, or want
> to keep WordPress, great. Maybe once we add in resourcing requirements
> re: who/how much time it takes to maintain we end up having to tweak
> the design for more reuse. But ultimately every decision needs to
> focus on those purposes.
>
> That gets us towards a fully intentional design, which we can more
> clearly judge for "is it or isn't it valuable?"
>
> Geo
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> _______________________________________________
> dev-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
> Parul Mathur <mailto:[hidden email]>
> June 18, 2014 at 2:13 PM
> Hi community members,
>
> The Mozilla Quality Assurance team is looking for feedback regarding
> its website http://quality.mozilla.org (QMO).
>
> 1. What do you expect to see when you go to QMO? Are your expectations
> met?
> 2. What does QMO do well?
> 3. What can QMO do better?
> 4. What is completely missing from QMO but should be there?
>
> We got some feedback on the Community Building mailing list:
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001614.html 
>
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/community-building/2014-June/001637.html 
>
>
> We'd love to have your feedback too!
>
> Looking forward to hearing from you.
>
> Thanks,
> Parul
> (Mozilla Community Member)
> IRC nick pragmatic on #qa
> _______________________________________________
> dev-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
12