Is the internal QA plugin's content reused in the e2e Practice Pack, and on what terms? #544

Activity

1. orioltf

   added

   app:unic-archon-dlc

   wayfinder:taskWayfinder ticket: do the thingWayfinder ticket: do the thing

   on Sep 23, 2026
2. orioltf

   added a parent issue on Sep 23, 2026

   • wayfinder: e2e specs from acceptance criteria, at a second Consumer #538
3. orioltf

   marked this as blocking on Sep 23, 2026

   • Where does the e2e Practice Pack live, and what name prefix does it own? #545
4. orioltf commented on Sep 28, 2026

   

   orioltf

   on Sep 28, 2026

   Last edited by orioltf

   MemberAuthor

   More actions

   Constraint from Does an e2e test become an outer loop around /build's unit TDD loop for a new feature?, 2026-09-28

   That ticket took two things from the internal QA plugin, as read at origin/main a051370:

   • The three verdicts for a failing automated test, from skills/qa-test-failure-analysis/SKILL.md: genuine bug, broken or stale test, environment issue.
   • The defect severity scale, from its defect management skill: Blocker, Critical, Major, Minor, Trivial.

   The terms agreed on this ticket must cover both. If the answer is "build fresh", the e2e Practice Pack still needs a taxonomy and a scale with this shape, and that ticket's decision names these two as the source.

   The internal QA plugin also has no test-first loop. It automates acceptance criteria that already exist, for features that already exist. So nothing in it covers an Acceptance Slice written before the code, and the Practice Pack cannot take that part from it.
5. orioltf commented on Sep 29, 2026

   

   orioltf

   on Sep 29, 2026

   Last edited by orioltf

   MemberAuthor

   More actions

   Input measured 2026-09-29: what can move without the authors

   The internal QA plugin's main is still a051370, read by git ls-remote on 2026-09-29. Three facts change what the authors must decide.

   • The severity scale is not the internal QA plugin's own. Its defect management skill names the defect management step of Unic's software quality management process as its source, and its Bug Template mirrors an internal Jira ticket. The e2e Practice Pack can cite the process page directly, so the scale needs no terms from the authors.
   • The three verdicts cite no source. skills/qa-test-failure-analysis/SKILL.md gives genuine bug, broken or stale test, and environment issue, with no reference. The shape is common, so the Practice Pack can build it fresh and name #541 as the reason. Copying the internal QA plugin's wording needs terms.
   • The repository has no licence file at a051370, and it is private. So nothing is copied without the authors' word.

   What still needs the authors: whether the Practice Pack reuses the Playwright generator, the Playwright code reviewer and the reference architecture, and on which terms (copy with attribution, depend on it, or build fresh).

   New since 4d954c4, for that conversation:

   • references/playwright-cross-platform.md: Playwright components for Windows, macOS and Linux.
   • skills/qa-what-to-test/SKILL.md: test analysis for a story or a bug. It touches the fog item on #538 about which criteria are worth automating.
   • Its orchestrator skill and seven agents built around the process steps, under agents/.
6. orioltf commented on Sep 30, 2026

   

   orioltf

   on Sep 30, 2026

   Last edited by orioltf

   MemberAuthor

   More actions

   First answer from the internal QA plugin's authors, 2026-09-30

   The maintainer asked one of the internal QA plugin's two authors whether its content may be reused as an e2e Practice Pack for the DLC.

   The answer is yes. In their words: "We would be happy to share … you can use it already as you would like to." Three more points came with it:

   • The internal QA plugin is in an open beta and will change. They will tell the maintainer when a change is large.
   • They have asked to move the plugin from its private repository to a public one on GitHub.
   • The maintainer raised a risk: two artefacts that do the same job will drift apart. The QA team is aware of it and has discussed it. They expect to choose one in the end. For now they would rather gain experience than build one solution for every case. They will raise the question with the other author.

   What this settles, and what it does not

   • Settled: the Practice Pack may take content from the internal QA plugin. This covers the files the constraint from #541 names: the three failure verdicts and the severity scale.
   • Open: the other author's word. That author created most of the files the Practice Pack would take, so the terms need that author too. The first author is raising it with them.
   • Open: the form of reuse. Proposed default: copy with attribution, naming the internal QA plugin, the commit copied from, and both authors. Pin every copy to a commit. The plugin is in beta, so a copy that names no commit cannot be compared with what changed upstream later.
   • Open: a licence. The internal QA plugin at a051370 has no licence file. A move to a public repository would need one anyway.
   • Correction to the 2026-09-29 input: it says the severity scale can be cited from the defect management step of Unic's software quality management process directly. The Unic Graph copy of that step read on 2026-09-30 holds no Blocker-to-Trivial scale, and a search of Unic's process register found no page with one. The register source is therefore unconfirmed. The question goes to the other author, who owns that step in the register. Until that author answers, treat the scale as content of the internal QA plugin under the terms above.

   For the map

   Two artefacts for the same job is a known and accepted risk for now. It bears on where the Practice Pack lives (#545). The question of which one survives goes into #538's fog.

   This ticket stays open until the other author answers.
7. orioltf commented on Oct 1, 2026

   

   orioltf

   on Oct 1, 2026

   Last edited by orioltf

   MemberAuthor

   More actions

   Terms, 2026-10-01

   The first author of the internal QA plugin agreed to the proposed form of reuse. The Practice Pack copies files with attribution, naming the internal QA plugin, the commit copied from, and both authors, and pins each copy to that commit. That settles the form-of-reuse question from the 2026-09-30 comment.

   Three items stay open. The first author is taking all three to the other author:

   • the other author's agreement;
   • a licence for the internal QA plugin;
   • which page of Unic's process register documents the Blocker-to-Trivial severity scale. The other author wrote that part of the register.

   The first author has also moved the plugin's own scripts to cross-env.

   This ticket stays open until the other author answers.
8. orioltf commented on Oct 20, 2026

   

   orioltf

   on Oct 20, 2026

   Last edited by orioltf

   MemberAuthor

   More actions

   Resolution, 2026-10-20

   The other author of the internal QA plugin answered the three open items from the 2026-10-01 comment. The answers change the form of reuse.

   What the answers say

   • Agreement. The other author agrees to the reuse, and to copying with attribution.
   • Licence. The internal QA plugin now has a licence, added on 2026-10-02. It is proprietary to Unic AG and for internal use only. It grants no right to copy or publish any part outside Unic AG without Unic AG's prior written permission. The plugin also holds Unic-internal material: content derived from pages of Unic's process register, and links to internal systems.
   • Severity scale source. The scale is on the page of the defect management step of Unic's software quality management process, § Error Classification & Severity Levels. This corrects the 2026-09-30 comment, which found no source in the register.

   Decision

   The e2e Practice Pack copies no file from the internal QA plugin. This repository is public, so a copy here would publish the plugin's content outside Unic AG, which its licence does not allow. The agreement of both authors does not replace the written permission the licence asks of Unic AG.

   The Practice Pack writes its own failure verdicts and severity scale, with the shape #541 set:

   • three verdicts for a failing automated test: genuine bug, broken or stale test, environment issue;
   • a defect severity scale: Blocker, Critical, Major, Minor, Trivial.

   Both are common QA vocabulary. The Practice Pack states them in its own words and names their origin: the defect management step of Unic's software quality management process for the scale, and the internal QA plugin for both. #541's constraint on this ticket allows this: if the answer is "build fresh", the Practice Pack still needs a taxonomy and a scale with this shape.

   Rejected: the Consumer installs the internal QA plugin and the Practice Pack points at it. That plugin runs its own chain from test generation to defect reporting, so the Consumer would hold two chains for the same job. A plugin also does not reach an Archon node through settings alone, so /build would not see it.

   The 2026-10-01 terms (copy with attribution, pinned to a commit) are superseded.

   For the map

   #545 no longer depends on the internal QA plugin's terms, so its edge onto this ticket goes. It still waits on #520.
9. orioltf

   closed this as completedon Oct 20, 2026
10. orioltf

    unmarked this as blocking on Oct 20, 2026

    • Where does the e2e Practice Pack live, and what name prefix does it own? #545
11. orioltf

    changed the title [-]Is p46-qa's content reused in the e2e Practice Pack, and on what terms?[/-] [+]Is the internal QA plugin's content reused in the e2e Practice Pack, and on what terms?[/+] on Oct 30, 2026