QA/Meetings/20110606

Attendees

People present (lines said):

1. jlaska (137)
2. rbergeron (45)
3. adamw (40)
4. j_dulaney (40)
5. vhumpa (35)
6. kparal (15)
7. Viking-Ice (15)
8. tgr__ (14)
9. tflink (6)
10. athmane (4)
11. jsmith (2)
12. Southern_Gentlem (1)

Unable to attend:

1. Rhe (hopefully sleeping)
2. Hongqing (hopefully sleeping)
3. wutao85 (hopefully sleeping)

Agenda

• Proposed meeting agenda
• MeetBot summary

Release criteria updates

• vhumpa started a discussion on test + desktop lists last week - http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/desktop/2011-June/007274.html
• Next steps ... decide whether to adjust upstream, or to resolve using Fedora .desktop files
• ACTION: vhumpa/adamw - reach out to GNOME for opinions on presenting duplicate application names in overview

AutoQA updates

• Kparal reported that the announcement of 'pretty patch' that was just posted into autoqa-devel - https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/autoqa-devel/2011-June/002344.html
• Tflink is finalizing test result email reduction patchset - expecting patch out for review later today
• Jlaska noted that packaging/testing for soon-to-be-released autotest-0.13.0 is almost complete. Packages available in autoqa fedora-15-testing repo.

1. Patch review and testing of autoqa-0.5.0 expected this week

IPv6 Test Day

• World IPv6 Day is happening on June 8, along with a Fedora IPv6 test day - QA/Test_Day:2011-06-08_IPv6
• Red Hat blog post expected tomorrow that will link to test day wiki
• Some test cases available on the wiki already, including http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_NetworkManager_ipv6, http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_NFS_ipv6
• More test needed for any cli ipv6 tools, printing and <other>
• ACTION: adamw - send test-announce@ for IPv6 test day (jlaska, 15:33:42)
• ACTION: jlaska - test day wiki cleanup (remove boilerplate) (jlaska, 15:33:53)
• ACTION: tgr__ - provide wiki instructions for native ipv6 connectivity (jlaska, 15:34:10)

Open Discussion - <your topic here>

Fedora-qa F15 TRAC tickets

• Jlaska cleaning up the Fedora 15 fedora-qa TRAC milestone in preparation for Fedora 16 tickets
• Please cleanup any tickets currently assigned to you - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/query?status=new&status=assigned&status=reopened&milestone=Fedora+15

F16 QA Schedule

• Releases/16/Schedule
• rbergeron noted that the Fedora 16 QA schedule is available for review. Patches/comments/questions encouraged
• Times/milestones should not have changed, comparison between f15 and f16 available at http://rbergero.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-15/f-15-quality-tasks.html vs. http://rbergero.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-16/f-16-quality-tasks.html

Fixing features

• Discussion is underway on how to identify and resolve specific issues with the feature proces
• If you have any thoughts on the good, the bad, the ugly in the feature process, feel free to add your commentary to wiki page - Fixing_features

Fedora 16 Cloud Test Days

• http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/cloud/2011-June/000632.html
• David Nalley started discussion about possible cloud test day topics for F16. Planning is happening much earlier this time, if interested, please join and help move the discussion along.

Action Items

1. vhumpa/adamw - reach out to GNOME for opinions on presenting duplicate application names in overview
2. adamw - send test-announce@ for IPv6 test day
3. jlaska - test day wiki cleanup (remove boilerplate)
4. tgr - provide wiki instructions for native ipv6 connectivity

IRC Log

jlaska	#startmeeting Fedora QA Meeting	15:00
zodbot	Meeting started Mon Jun 6 15:00:13 2011 UTC. The chair is jlaska. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.	15:00
zodbot	Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.	15:00
jlaska	#meetingname fedora-qa	15:00
zodbot	The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa'	15:00
jlaska	#topic Roll Call	15:00
* Viking-Ice here..		15:00
adamw	yo	15:00
jlaska	tgr__: Hi there ... we're just doing roll call atm	15:00
jlaska	Viking-Ice: adamw: hey hey	15:00
* tflink is here		15:00
* athmane is there		15:01
tgr__	well, i'm here :)	15:01
* jlaska greets tflink & athmane		15:01
* jsmith lurks		15:01
* j_dulaney waves		15:01
* kparal here		15:01
jlaska	hi j_dulaney && kparal	15:01
* vhumpa says hi		15:02
jlaska	helloooo	15:02
* rbergeron takes a seat		15:02
j_dulaney	jlaska, vhumpa, kparal	15:02
jlaska	okay, let's get started	15:02
jlaska	we don't have a complicated/lengthy agenda today ... just checking in on a few recurring topics	15:03
jlaska	as always, feel free to raise topics during open-discussion	15:03
jlaska	and thanks to vhumpa j_dulaney and adamw for #chair'ing last week	15:03
j_dulaney	.bacon	15:03
zodbot	I love bacon, you love bacon, WE ALL LOVE BACON!	15:03
vhumpa	jlaska: was fun	15:03
j_dulaney	Indeed	15:03
jlaska	So, I'm skipping the 'previous meeting follow-up' topic today ... since that's really covered by the agenda	15:04
* jlaska queues adamw first ..		15:04
jlaska	#topic Release Criteria Updates	15:04
jlaska	well, vhumpa too really	15:04
jlaska	What's the word on the "too-similar menu names" proposal that went out last week?	15:04
vhumpa	jlaska: I started a discussion on test + desktops mailing lists	15:05
* adamw defers to vhumpa		15:05
vhumpa	People are supportive of the idea that *something* needs to be done with the issue	15:05
jlaska	#info vhumpa started a discussion on test + desktop lists last week	15:05
vhumpa	vhumpa: ideas spread from modifying the app launcher to make sure that they would differentiate the apps with same names properly - to just renaming some of the problematic apps	15:06
jlaska	I guess depending on the solution ... a different group of people would need to make the changes?	15:07
vhumpa	For example of this issue: You all know terminal/terminal etc.	15:07
j_dulaney	Indeed	15:07
vhumpa	jlaska: Yes, the first one, simply, is upstream	15:07
vhumpa	thus not something I think we can do very quickly	15:07
vhumpa	Should gnome-shell offer e.g. popups for the app icons, that would present one set of means how to deal with the issue	15:08
Viking-Ice	how does QA fit into this discussion as in is this not something all the *DE should take care of among themselves ?	15:08
vhumpa	But, I am not sure how reasonable it would be to push that through	15:08
adamw	right,viking	15:08
adamw	the fix isn't our problem exactly	15:08
athmane	Viking-Ice, +1	15:09
jlaska	Viking-Ice: yeah ... I'm just seeing this as QA bringing this to appropriate desktop attn	15:09
vhumpa	That brings me to what FEdora can do...	15:09
adamw	what we're concerned with is whether this should be a release requirement	15:09
j_dulaney	Indeed	15:09
vhumpa	It's a problem of a few apps really... So what we can do is merely to rename some of them, in their desktop files	15:09
Viking-Ice	I'm not seeing this as an release requirement	15:09
vhumpa	the QE connection:	15:10
vhumpa	enforce that it is done with a requirement	15:10
athmane	if we tests each desktop separately this issue will not raise, afaik	15:10
vhumpa	athmane: true	15:10
vhumpa	athmane: partially	15:11
j_dulaney	The biggest issue I see is apps within the same desktop	15:11
vhumpa	there are issues even withing single desktop	15:11
jlaska	what's the ideal outcome for this topic? ... upstream acknowledgement of the issue?	15:11
vhumpa	I suppose so	15:11
jlaska	... formalizing tests and applicable criteria?	15:11
jlaska	(depending on whether it's accepted or not)	15:11
vhumpa	Meaning.. upstream acknowledgment is a "pony" perhaps	15:12
adamw	we should probably add it to the desktop menus test case	15:12
j_dulaney	I'm thinking that a good outcome would simply be that what the user sees is different names for different apps	15:12
vhumpa	I agree with Adam on this one.	15:12
jlaska	I don't see any feedback from anyone upstream on this topic ... have they weighed in on this yet?	15:12
vhumpa	jlaska: nope	15:12
athmane	maybe we should fill bugs on upstream tracking app ?	15:13
j_dulaney	The actual names don't necesarily have to be different for the actual app, just the menu choices	15:13
Viking-Ice	are these apps that any of the *DE ship by default or is this something that is mixed apps between *DE ?	15:13
j_dulaney	Viking-Ice: Default	15:13
j_dulaney	For instance, within just Gnome: Softare Update and Software Updates	15:13
adamw	so we have a plan for testing	15:14
vhumpa	Some are issue in deafult, some become an issue when you have multiple environments installed	15:14
jlaska	What's the next step? Should we focus on trying to get feedback/input from upstream on this topic?	15:14
Viking-Ice	anyway this sounds to me just something that the relevant *DE maintainers need to take care of not something related to QA per se	15:14
adamw	then the question is, should it be a release criterion, i.e., should we require same name situations to be resolved for release	15:14
jlaska	adamw: should we move forward with testing and criteria without feedback from GNOME?	15:14
j_dulaney	The QA angle would be enforcement	15:14
vhumpa	I would concentrate in choosing menu names around Fedora desktops to minimize this issue... Upstream should come later	15:14
j_dulaney	adamw: I think so	15:14
adamw	jlaska: feedback would be good, i guess	15:15
jlaska	adamw: seems like it should be required to me	15:15
jlaska	how can we create criteria and tests without their input?	15:15
* jlaska might be missing something though		15:15
vhumpa	The problem lies in how Fedora names apps, which I am not sure how connected is to upstream really	15:15
jlaska	err ... I'd want to avoid creating tests and criteria that GNOME isn't interested in honoring/fixing etc...	15:15
jlaska	vhumpa: good point ... it really depends on the implementation	15:16
adamw	jlaska: well, addressing it upstream is only one approach	15:16
jlaska	yes, I see now, gotcha	15:16
adamw	i can see, for instance, that if upstream GNOME decide they don't care, we would decide Fedora still does care	15:16
jlaska	right, that makes sense	15:16
vhumpa	adamw: yes	15:16
jlaska	so when will we know which of those routes to take?	15:16
Viking-Ice	sounds like a ( test ) candidate for fit and finish	15:16
j_dulaney	+1	15:16
jlaska	I guess we can conclude that if we don't get GNOME feedback, then it's up to Fedora to decide?	15:17
vhumpa	So the question is 1) Do we ask upstream to help with this 2) We just rename a few menu items in Fedora	15:17
* j_dulaney goes with 2		15:18
vhumpa	+1	15:18
Southern_Gentlem	both	15:18
j_dulaney	Easiest solution	15:18
* jsmith goes with 1)		15:18
Viking-Ice	both	15:18
jlaska	we'll likely go with #2 ... but I'd like to give #1 another attempt	15:18
adamw	vhumpa: i think that's kind of up to the devs to decide really	15:18
adamw	i think we may be going round in circles at this point?	15:18
jlaska	yup ... let's wrap up on this topic	15:18
vhumpa	1) definitely too - but facing reality that it would be a more long term solution but for later	15:18
vhumpa	True	15:19
jlaska	anyone want to approach GNOME with this topic this week?	15:19
jlaska	if not ... I'll take it	15:19
jlaska	or any other #action items ... feel free to grab	15:19
vhumpa	If I know how to approach them, I will	15:19
jlaska	vhumpa: okay, thank you	15:20
jlaska	anything else to cover on this before next week?	15:20
adamw	i'll sync up with you on that	15:20
Viking-Ice	is this only relevant to Gnome or is this problem present in all *DE we ship ?	15:20
vhumpa	Meaning: we'll be aproaching for modifing the launcher, right? You don't just mean renaming apps on Upstream side	15:20
vhumpa	Unsure on that	15:20
jlaska	#action vhumpa/adamw - reach out to GNOME for opinions on presenting duplicate application names in overview	15:21
j_dulaney	Viking-Ice: I'm not sure about within other DEs	15:21
jlaska	Viking-Ice: KDE solves it iirc, but it's not specific to a single DE	15:21
jlaska	While we are here, anything else on release criteria?	15:21
jlaska	adamw: any other notable criteria changes to highlight?	15:21
adamw	er, i think i did some	15:22
jlaska	heh	15:22
adamw	but i think we may have covered them last week	15:22
jlaska	okay	15:22
adamw	oh, the 'release-blocking desktops' thing may have been this week	15:22
j_dulaney	That was last	15:23
adamw	okay. then, i think nothing new.	15:23
adamw	(sorry, it's been a busy week.)	15:23
jlaska	okay, then moving on	15:23
jlaska	I'm switching the next two topics so we don't keep tgr__ waiting too long	15:23
jlaska	#topic IPv6 Test Day	15:23
jlaska	#link QA/Test_Day:2011-06-08_IPv6	15:23
jlaska	#info World IPv6 Day is happening on June 8, along with a Fedora IPv6 test day	15:24
jlaska	so this is just intended as a check-in for Test Day preparedness	15:24
* j_dulaney has the network in his house setup for IPv6 already		15:24
adamw	i haven't checked in on this for a few days i'm afraid	15:25
adamw	since my last email shot	15:25
adamw	anyone know of any recent developments?	15:25
jlaska	looks like we have 2 test cases linked .. .and one in need of a test case	15:25
jlaska	tgr__: any updates/concerns on your end with regards to test day prep?	15:25
jlaska	#link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_NetworkManager_ipv6	15:25
jlaska	#link	15:25
jlaska	#link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_NFS_ipv6	15:25
jlaska	#info test case needed for ipv6 printing	15:26
tgr__	Red Hat will announce the event in a blog and refer to the Fedora test and ask for participation	15:26
jlaska	tgr__: do you know when that is going out?	15:26
* Viking-Ice throws in --> http://ipv6eyechart.ripe.net/ <-- for interested parties reading the meeting logs..		15:27
tgr__	tomorrow if everything goes right	15:27
adamw	awesome	15:27
rbergeron	the press blog?	15:27
tgr__	I've written a howto which covers enabling ipv6 on RHEL/fedora	15:27
adamw	today would be a good day to be blogging about this for everyone else	15:27
tgr__	using configuration file/NetworkManager	15:27
tgr__	and instructions how to verify if a website has been reached via IPv6 or not	15:27
tgr__	this alone should get us some feedback on any basic issues	15:28
j_dulaney	tgr_: You want to link to that for info?	15:28
j_dulaney	Or is it not online, yet?	15:28
* j_dulaney notes that he'll put something in his blog as well.		15:28
tgr__	it's not online yet, we are having ISP troubles	15:28
jlaska	the wiki links to rawhide live images ... I assume we just want F15 live images for this?	15:29
tgr__	if we can't get it up within red hat I will provide the info via the fedora wiki	15:29
j_dulaney	jlaska: +1	15:29
adamw	yeah, good catch, let's fix that	15:29
* jlaska fixes		15:29
tgr__	i'm working on getting www.fedoraproject.org listed as participant on isoc.org	15:30
jlaska	anyone want to volunteer to send an event reminder to test-announce@ ?	15:30
tgr__	it's currently only listed as IPv6 enabled website	15:30
jlaska	tgr__: nice!	15:30
adamw	jlaska: i can do it	15:31
jlaska	adamw: thank you	15:31
jlaska	Anyone object if I move the different setup procedures out into unique wiki pages?	15:32
jlaska	just to clean up the main page a little?	15:32
jlaska	or is that not really needed	15:32
j_dulaney	jlaska: Good idea	15:32
tgr__	i think that's a good idea	15:32
jlaska	okay, I'll make a minor adjustment after the meeting	15:32
adamw	yeah sounds great	15:32
tgr__	i will add instructions how to do setup if isp provides native ipv6 connectivity	15:32
adamw	there's some boilerplate text still in there too which we should remove	15:32
j_dulaney	+1	15:33
jlaska	adamw: like the test results stuff?	15:33
adamw	"Provide a list of test areas or test cases that you'd like contributors to execute. For other examples, see Category:Test_Cases. "	15:33
adamw	and yes	15:33
adamw	though we need to set up a proper table for that	15:33
jlaska	okay ... I'll include that in my wiki cleanup	15:33
adamw	thanks	15:33
jlaska	#action adamw - send test-announce@ for IPv6 test day	15:33
jlaska	#action jlaska - test day wiki cleanup (remove boilerplate)	15:33
jlaska	#action tgr__ - provide wiki instructions for native ipv6 connectivity	15:34
jlaska	feel free to grab any #action's that I missed	15:34
jlaska	tgr__: thanks for joining today ... anything else you want to cover before we move on?	15:35
tgr__	jlaska: i think i'm done, thanks	15:35
jlaska	tgr__: great, thank you!	15:35
jlaska	#topic AutoQA Updates	15:35
* kparal goes on stage		15:36
jlaska	it's time for a regular autoqa check-in!	15:36
kparal	I have only one update today	15:36
* jlaska sees he has plenty of unread autoqa-devel mails to catch up on		15:36
kparal	and that is the announcement of 'pretty patch' that was just posted into autoqa-devel	15:36
kparal	#link https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/autoqa-devel/2011-June/002344.html	15:36
jlaska	woah, that knocks out quite a few tickets :)	15:37
kparal	this patch should allow us to create pretty html logs	15:37
* j_dulaney was just looking at that		15:37
jlaska	yay! ...	15:37
jlaska	#link http://kparal.fedorapeople.org/autoqa/upgradepath2.html	15:37
j_dulaney	Shiny	15:37
kparal	they should be more concise and readable than the previous logs	15:37
adamw	ooooooh pretty	15:38
j_dulaney	More shiny	15:38
vhumpa	Thus the name :)	15:38
* j_dulaney likes shiny		15:38
adamw	now people will break their packages just to see the failure	15:38
kparal	now we need to review the patch and merge into master. but the most of the work should be done already	15:38
kparal	adamw: let's hope not :)	15:38
jlaska	#link http://kparal.fedorapeople.org/autoqa/depcheck.html	15:38
jlaska	that's awesome stuff	15:39
jlaska	I think I can understand depcheck output now :)	15:39
j_dulaney	Wow, the shiny just keeps piling up	15:39
jlaska	hopefully I can stop bugging tflink for help with that!	15:39
kparal	this patch should be the core of 0.5.0 release, hopefully to come really soon	15:39
kparal	together with email reduction patch from tflink	15:39
j_dulaney	How's that one going?	15:40
tflink	pretty much done, other than a little bit more of cleanup and testing	15:40
* j_dulaney keeps getting distracted; cheerleaders		15:40
tflink	I'm planning to send out a patch email to autoqa-devel today	15:40
kparal	tflink: great	15:40
vhumpa	tflink: nice!	15:41
jlaska	tflink: I still haven't heard back yet on the email notification for all passed results	15:41
j_dulaney	+1	15:41
tflink	jlaska: I'll make sure that the configuration works so that we can change it later	15:41
tflink	without changing code	15:41
kparal	jlaska: I have talked to some developers and they liked the idea of not getting bothered when everything works fine	15:41
jlaska	tflink: but I now see my lucky ping recipient online ... so I'll see if we can get some more info	15:41
jlaska	kparal: okay, good to know ... sounds like this will be tunable (without patching) based on how tflink is implementing	15:42
kparal	well, and that was the big announcement of today. I have no further updates	15:43
jlaska	#info tflink finalizing test result email reduction patchset - expecting patch out for review later today	15:43
jlaska	With help from lmr, I've been packaging what will become autotest-0.13.0	15:43
jlaska	finding a few bugs here and there (nothing major), but so far it's working okay	15:44
jlaska	note, those changes are in the autoqa fedora-15-testing repo ... so make sure you *arent* using that when you are testing for the next autoqa release	15:44
vhumpa	Need to run, bye for now everybody.	15:44
jlaska	vhumpa: cya!	15:44
jlaska	#info Packaging for soon-to-be-released autotest-0.13.0 almost complete	15:45
jlaska	kparal: tflink: anything else to cover on AutoQA? I guess it depends on patch review for when we'll start the packaging machine for autoqa-0.5.0 ?	15:45
kparal	jlaska: no. yes. :)	15:46
tflink	nothing I can think of. review and testing for this week, yes	15:46
jlaska	heh, okay ... thanks for the autoqa updates all	15:46
jlaska	#topic Open Discussion - <your topic here>	15:46
* rbergeron raises her hand		15:47
jlaska	I've got just a quick status update if there are no other open discussion topics	15:47
jlaska	rbergeron: what's up?	15:47
rbergeron	jlaska: go first, i have a few minor things	15:47
jlaska	s/I've got/I have/	15:47
jlaska	#topic Open Discussion - fedora-qa F15 TRAC tickets	15:47
jlaska	I'm doing some TRAC ticket maintenance to prepare for the retrospective tickets	15:48
* Viking-Ice points out we need to start looking at potential features being introduced and if we need to cover that ( grub2 and btrfs pop up to my mind )		15:48
jlaska	#link https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/query?status=new&status=assigned&status=reopened&milestone=Fedora+15	15:48
rbergeron	Viking-Ice: +1	15:48
jlaska	Viking-Ice: good point ... I believe grub2 is in TRAC already, we'll need something for btrfs I believe	15:48
jlaska	there are still some open tickets in the 'Fedora 15' TRAC milestone ... I closed out all the completed test events already	15:48
jlaska	and I'll likely start annoying ticket owners to find the most suitable outcome for any remaining tickets	15:49
jlaska	prepare to be annoyed!	15:49
jlaska	#chair rbergeron	15:49
zodbot	Current chairs: jlaska rbergeron	15:49
jlaska	rbergeron: #topic away	15:49
rbergeron	Woot. thanks	15:50
j_dulaney	jlaska: Since I'm already using btrfs, I can start on test cases for it	15:50
rbergeron	#topic Schedule	15:50
rbergeron	#link Releases/16/Schedule	15:50
rbergeron	#info schedule is posted, feedback is welcome, please.	15:50
jlaska	rbergeron: is there any *easy* way to diff the F15 and F16 schedules?	15:50
rbergeron	I know you guys have a retrospective; if there are things to be converted into schedule changes, let me know.	15:50
rbergeron	jlaska: ahahahahaha.	15:50
jlaska	okay, I'll be bugging you about any schedule topics that come out of the retrospective	15:51
rbergeron	I assume you mean the "original" schedule vs. schedule as it turned out?	15:51
jlaska	rbergeron: I should clarify ... a human-readable diff :)	15:51
rbergeron	I haven't added anything *new* for you guys.	15:51
rbergeron	I'd speculate that the easiest way would be this:	15:51
adamw	are any of the windows noticeably different?	15:51
rbergeron	http://rbergero.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-15/f-15-quality-tasks.html vs. http://rbergero.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-16/f-16-quality-tasks.html	15:52
rbergeron	adamw: they shouldn't be.	15:52
rbergeron	Other than - the dates showing in *that* F15 schedule are the slipped dates.	15:52
Viking-Ice	you might want to compose any previous schedules as in what they where and how they turned out to be	15:52
jlaska	ah, okay	15:52
rbergeron	This schedule is more or less as the original f15 schedule was.	15:52
rbergeron	Just, 6 months later.	15:53
jlaska	I'll try to come up with more focused feedback after finishing the retrospective ... but the branch timing and Alpha still lend to slippage	15:54
jlaska	I don't have any great ideas at the moment	15:54
jlaska	will try to process	15:54
* rbergeron nods		15:54
rbergeron	happy to have a brainstorming meeting with you / whoever else is interested.	15:54
rbergeron	(or should be there, lol)	15:54
* jlaska notes ... there isn't an option to "Create a new month" in the schedule		15:54
* Viking-Ice is not foreseeing any slips this release cycle..		15:55
rbergeron	any other schedule q's/comments?	15:55
rbergeron	#topic Fixing features	15:55
rbergeron	I'll keep this brief:	15:56
rbergeron	Basically some folks have mentioned that the feature process is perhaps not quite as robust as it could be, or could account for "different types of features" better (aka: marketing-ish features vs. stuff that is going to break the universe features)	15:56
rbergeron	Fixing_features <--- your feedback is welcome.	15:56
rbergeron	#info if you have any thoughts on the good, the bad, the ugly in the feature process, feel free to add your commentary to wiki page.	15:57
rbergeron	And that's all on that.	15:57
* jlaska queues for reading		15:57
* rbergeron looks around before continuing		15:57
Viking-Ice	features aren't mandadory process afaik ..	15:57
adamw	yes	15:58
rbergeron	well, i think that depends. and I think that's part of the problem.	15:58
rbergeron	but not going to open pandora's box at the moment. :)	15:58
rbergeron	Just wnated to give a heads-up to that, if you're interested.	15:59
jlaska	yes, save that for #pandora :)	15:59
rbergeron	#topic Cloud stuff	15:59
rbergeron	You may notice that there are a boatload of cloud features for f16, we're already talking about test-day stuff, possibly breaking into two test days.	15:59
rbergeron	ke4qqq posted something to the cloud list for anyone who might be interested in helping us work that stuff out.	15:59
rbergeron	http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/cloud/2011-June/000632.html	15:59
rbergeron	(basically, we haz lots of stuff, we should start planning now rather than last second like last time.)	16:00
adamw	awesome	16:00
rbergeron	because there is going to be a lotta stuff. :)	16:00
adamw	it's definitely a good idea to hash out a clear test day topic	16:00
adamw	'cloud test day' is pretty vague, so splitting it like last time is good\	16:00
j_dulaney	Are there going to be any clouds setup specifically for us to test on?	16:00
adamw	we can always make room for more test days, so don't worry about having too many	16:00
jlaska	yeah, I think that worked pretty well	16:00
jlaska	wasn't too vague	16:00
rbergeron	yeah, and we can group them by different types of cloud apps.	16:00
jlaska	cloud test week :)	16:00
rbergeron	j_dulaney: unknown. that's part of what we need to solve ahead of time, so we can get that kind of thing set up for folks without it being a nightmare.	16:01
jlaska	anyway ... will have to see how the features fall out	16:01
Viking-Ice	cloud test week sounds like a good way to proceed	16:01
jlaska	s/fall/pan/	16:01
j_dulaney	+1	16:01
rbergeron	But: would appreciate any feedback if you're on the cloud list. :)	16:01
jlaska	Viking-Ice: I know you like the test week idea ... assuming we have a series of clear topics, that might work	16:01
jlaska	rbergeron: okay	16:01
rbergeron	And would like to invite folks to come to a meeting maybe in 2 weeks or so, but will update on that next week. :)	16:02
rbergeron	That's it. :)	16:02
j_dulaney	Sweet	16:02
* j_dulaney is getting hungry		16:02
jlaska	#topic Open Discussion - Last call for topics	16:02
Viking-Ice	jlaska, cloud test week which would cover Aeolus,CloudFS,CloudStactk, Sheepdog testing..	16:03
* jlaska sets the fuse for 2 minutes		16:03
jlaska	Viking-Ice: yeah, could be ... will see what comes out of that thread	16:03
jlaska	1 minute until #endmeeting ...	16:04
* j_dulaney wanders off in search of food and to start thinking about btrfs test case		16:04
j_dulaney	Peace, y'all	16:04
rbergeron	Viking-Ice: yeah, and all the other ones I know of in the pipeline but aren't posted yet (openstack, pacemaker-cloud, $others)	16:04
jlaska	cya j_dulaney	16:04
jlaska	30 seconds until #endmeeting ...	16:04
jlaska	Thanks everyone for your time today!! ... I'll follow-up with minutes to the list	16:05
jlaska	#endmeeting	16:05

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!