QA/Meetings/20130204

Attendees

• adamw (175)
• dan408 (63)
• Viking-Ice (46)
• tflink (38)
• kparal (20)
• satellit (5)
• zodbot (4)
• pjones (3)
• misc (2)
• jskladan (1)
• mjg59 (1)
• jskladan_ (1)
• nb (1)
• mkrizek (1)
• pschindl (1)

Agenda

• Criteria Revision
• Test Case Revision
• Fedora 19 feature list review
• Open floor

Criteria Revision

• adamw planning to draft a plan for improved presentation of the release criteria. tflink suggests moving the criteria out of the wiki could help, but for F19 for now it's likely to stay in wiki
• Ideas to keep in mind as part of the plan:
  • kparal - draw a line between simple explanations and lawyerish complex clauses
  • kparal/viking-ice - define terms that we're familiar with but a general reader may not be
  • tflink - ensure there's short text for each criterion for IRC meeting purposes
  • kparal - group the criteria (installation, desktop, networking...)
  • kparal - link to background info on each criterion (esp. discussion when it was created)
  • kparal - some mechanism for tagging criteria - "I hate when I search for PXE, but it is called "network boot" or similar"

Test Case Revision

• adamw suggested expanding the upgrade test case set a little
• viking-ice suggested identifying hw-dependent and non-hw-dependent test cases in the matrices
• kparal said we should finish revising the partitioning criteria
• adamw thought we could come up with a set of common partitioning operation test cases
• kparal suggested an explicit Secure Boot criterion
• We should try and get as much criteria revision and test case revision done before Alpha as possible

Fedora 19 Feature list review

• See Category:FeatureAnnounced and Releases/19/FeatureList
• Already listed as features of potential concern from last week's meeting:
  1. Features/NewFirstboot
  2. Features/SyslinuxOption
  3. Features/SystemdPredictableNetworkInterfaceNames
  4. Features/YumGroupsAsObjects
  5. Features/FixNetworkNameResolution
• Features/ReplaceMySQLwithMariaDB looks significant but we do not currently have planned testing for MySQL
  • tflink suggested that a comprehensive MySQL benchmark tool could act as a compatibility checker if we could find such a thing
  • viking-ice said we should ensure F18->F19 upgrades accomplish the mysql->mariadb switch smoothly
  • If mysql is to still be available in F19, we should check it can be installed and used
• On Features/SystemdPredictableNetworkInterfaceNames - we should check behaviour of firewalld and libvirt, particularly on upgrades; check 'em1' is still used for most onboard adapters
• Features/KScreen may impact KDE validation in a small way
• Features/SyslinuxOption would be worth doing some optional testing on at least: viking-ice suggested it should be a supported kickstart option

Open floor

N/A

Action items

• adamw to draft up a proposal for revising the presentation of the release criteria
• adamw to draft up a kickstart criterion for f19

IRC Log

adamw	#startmeeting Fedora QA meeting	16:00
zodbot	Meeting started Mon Feb 4 16:00:17 2013 UTC. The chair is adamw. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.	16:00
zodbot	Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.	16:00
adamw	#meetingname fedora-qa	16:00
zodbot	The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa'	16:00
dan408	here	16:00
adamw	#topic roll call	16:00
adamw	too early, dan, too early	16:00
* dan408 waves		16:00
* Viking-Ice here		16:00
* mkrizek is here		16:00
* satellit here		16:00
dan408	sorry i'll be later next time	16:00
* nb here		16:00
adamw	you better	16:00
* tflink is here		16:00
* kparal here		16:00
dan408	hey nb	16:00
* pschindl is here		16:01
dan408	hey tflink kparal satellit pschindl	16:01
dan408	adamw you should throw chairs at people	16:01
adamw	wow, full house	16:01
dan408	hey Viking-Ice	16:01
adamw	good point	16:01
dan408	where's jreznik	16:01
* kparal pokes jskladan		16:01
adamw	#chair tflink kparal satellit	16:01
zodbot	Current chairs: adamw kparal satellit tflink	16:01
adamw	funny how all these people somehow don't show up for blocker review ;)	16:01
kparal	dan408: I think jreznik was on FOSDEM	16:01
dan408	oh yeah that's right	16:01
kparal	or maybe still is	16:01
kparal	I don't know how long that lasts	16:02
dan408	yeah fosdem is in full effect	16:02
* jskladan lurks for sure		16:02
misc	fosdem finished yesterday	16:02
misc	( and yep, jrzeznik was there, do not remember when he left )	16:02
adamw	so they're probably still hungover?	16:02
dan408	+1 for recovery day	16:02
* adamw still hungover from fudcon		16:03
dan408	you?	16:03
adamw	:)	16:03
adamw	okay, so - we don't have 'previous meeting followup' this week as there were no action items	16:03
adamw	unless anyone has something to pick up that's not in the rest of the agenda?	16:04
adamw	https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20130204	16:04
dan408	well i added new nth process	16:04
dan408	but i didnt know if it was in the right place	16:04
dan408	like i told you the other day	16:04
adamw	we covered it last week	16:04
dan408	oh ok	16:04
adamw	https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20130128#Blocker_process_revision	16:05
adamw	alrighty, then straight on to:	16:05
adamw	#topic Criteria revision	16:05
adamw	i was hoping to have something a bit more concrete for the meeting, but unfortunately not yet	16:05
Viking-Ice	I guess we need to add back all the advanced storage stuff in criteria that got "suspended" in f18	16:06
adamw	but the idea here is to revamp how we present the criteria somehow - the 'giant list of text bullet points' thing has probably gone as far as it can go	16:06
dan408	i like it	16:06
dan408	but would	16:06
dan408	acceptedblocker	16:06
dan408	acceptedfb	16:06
dan408	be seperate bugs	16:06
dan408	or keywords	16:06
adamw	Viking-Ice: yeah, we have some content issues too	16:06
adamw	dan408: this is about the criteria - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_18_Alpha_Release_Criteria etc	16:06
tflink	and finishing up the storage criteria from F18	16:06
adamw	tflink: damnit, stop remembering that	16:06
dan408	well this is going to change isnt it	16:07
tflink	it's not like I proposed anything concrete, either :-P	16:07
dan408	for f19	16:07
adamw	dan408: well that's what we're talking about :)	16:07
dan408	well	16:07
kparal	I would like to see some simplified criteria page digestible by general users. with links to lawyer-like descriptions	16:07
dan408	what's proposed in the new anaconda	16:07
dan408	i mean a lot of it depends on that	16:07
tflink	adamw: did you ever make a concrete proposal based on discussions from fudcon?	16:08
adamw	tflink: not yet unfortunately	16:08
adamw	we never quite got around to drawing up a plan at fudcon, we just kinda talked round the issues, as i recall - i might've whiteboarded some of my crazy thoughts but i think that was all	16:08
kparal	and a QA vocabulary with common QA terms	16:08
adamw	kparal: also nice	16:08
dan408	i really liked tflink's app	16:09
adamw	i've been planning to try and draft up a new way to present them and send it to the list, but to avoid duplication, has anyone else been working down that line? or planning to?	16:09
Viking-Ice	I'm not so sure everyone is familiar with QA terms ( think newcomers ) at least not the from the field	16:09
dan408	like i was saying the ability for discussion and voting would make it perfect	16:09
adamw	Viking-Ice: yeah i think you and kparal are onto something there, we should have a glossary of some kind	16:09
adamw	dan408: again, this is just about presentation of the criteria, we're not talking about the blocker proposal / voting stuff right now	16:09
tflink	adamw: nothing concrete or anything that would happen in the near future, no	16:10
dan408	adamw: i know just saying	16:10
kparal	adamw: I haven't intended to work on this in the near future, no	16:10
kparal	so nothing in my back drawer	16:11
adamw	okay, so we got some good 'ideas to put into the plan' already - the legalistic/simple distinction and the glossary	16:11
adamw	anyone have any other ideas for me to put in the pot?	16:11
Viking-Ice	tflink, had already mentioned an rename of QA to better follow the industry definition but that is a massive ( at least wiki ) work doing so for little no benefit as I see it	16:11
kparal	Viking-Ice: rename to what?	16:11
dan408	adamw: just to try to get a better understanding of exactly what's coming so we aren't changing criterion on the fly	16:11
tflink	similar to making things simplified, have a shorter "summary" so that they fit in IRC lines	16:11
adamw	dan408: that's on the content side, but sure	16:11
adamw	#info adamw will be trying to come up with a proposal for better presenting the release criteria	16:12
adamw	#info ideas to keep in mind:	16:12
tflink	well, either a shorter "summary" or a better way to reference the criteria - rewriting them on the fly during review meetings is not fun	16:12
kparal	adamw: also I'd like to see the criteria grouped - for example installation criteria, desktop criteria, networking criteria, etc	16:12
adamw	#info kparal - draw a line between simple explanations and lawyerish complex clauses	16:13
kparal	but it's highly possible sometimes a criterion would fall into several groups	16:13
adamw	#info kparal/viking-ice - define terms that we're familiar with but a general reader may not be	16:13
dan408	dates would be nice	16:13
adamw	#info tflink - ensure there's short text for each criterion for IRC meeting purposes	16:13
adamw	#info kparal - group the criteria (installation, desktop, networking...)	16:13
tflink	kparal: I suspect he is referencing a conversation about "QA" -> "Quality Assistance" instead of "Quality Assurance" but I could be wrong	16:13
adamw	dan408: you mean dates of when the criteria were added?	16:14
adamw	or what?	16:14
kparal	and also a link to a discussion about that particular criterion would be great to have attached. it'd be easy to understand why the criterion was created	16:14
adamw	#info kparal - link to background info on each criterion (esp. discussion when it was created)	16:14
Viking-Ice	tflink, kparal yup that	16:14
adamw	kparal: you and I have all the same ideas I think :)	16:14
dan408	adamw: 1) dates of when all features are supposed to be approved by FESCO 2) deliverables and timelines for each feature 3) QA criterion for each feature (namely critical ones)	16:14
adamw	okay, you're still off in the weeds frm the topic we're actually meant to be on...	16:15
adamw	we have a feature topic coming up later	16:15
adamw	anything else for the criteria presentation?	16:15
kparal	one more: tags. I hate when I search for PXE, but it is called "network boot" or similar	16:15
adamw	#info kparal - some mechanism for tagging criteria - "I hate when I search for PXE, but it is called "network boot" or similar"	16:16
kparal	after the criterion there can be a few tags like "[PXE]"	16:16
dan408	sorry, i guess im always thinking far too ahead	16:16
adamw	you gotta let us catch up with you, dan :)	16:16
adamw	step away from the delorean	16:16
dan408	inorite	16:16
dan408	im already running rawhide	16:16
Viking-Ice	is the criteria something we are going to add to the qa blocker proposal page then text with tags and archive the wiki page ?	16:16
tflink	Viking-Ice: possibly but not for F19, I don't think	16:17
adamw	Viking-Ice: well that's a possibility, but i was just planning to revise it within the wiki for now	16:17
dan408	well is there anything burning on a stove right now?	16:17
adamw	apart from my pancakes? nope	16:18
dan408	cool	16:18
adamw	#info criteria revision proposal is just wiki-based for now, but there's a possibility we could move the criteria into the blocker tracking app in future if it gives us useful results	16:18
adamw	#action adamw to draft up a proposal for revising the presentation of the release criteria	16:18
dan408	no dates no nothing set in stone yet?	16:18
adamw	dan408: for f19? fesco didn't finish the proposed feature list yet i don't think	16:19
dan408	here	16:19
dan408	#link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/19/Schedule	16:19
tflink	which reminds me that I still haven't written anything down about ideas for changing the blocker tracking process as a whole yet (longer term than F19)	16:19
dan408	fesco is still voting on features	16:19
dan408	f19 branch end of feb	16:19
tflink	yeah, they're still reviewing features and AFAIK, are planning to look at proposed schedules on wednesday	16:19
adamw	they've said they're going to do the schedule when they're done with features, but they're committed to making sure we have a reasonable gap between 'schedule set' and 'alpha release'	16:19
tflink	nothing has been finalized yet, though	16:19
adamw	yeah, what's on that page right now is probably out of date	16:19
dan408	i proposed a spin, and i dont know if it ever made it to the spins list, jreznik told me the spins process is kind of fubar'd	16:20
adamw	okay, this is also not the spins meeting	16:20
adamw	i think we've got the criteria, next topic!	16:20
adamw	#topic Test case revision	16:20
Viking-Ice	dont we have a feature list of what has been accepted since last meeting which we can iterated through	16:20
adamw	Viking-Ice: there's a topic for that later, see agenda	16:21
adamw	so boblfoot added this, with the comment "Revising of test cases during the F18 Final Test Phase was less than optimal - how to avoid with F19?"	16:21
adamw	i guess the takeaway is we should try to make sure we're happy with the test case set by Alpha, as much as possible	16:21
Viking-Ice	as well as the criteria I would say	16:22
adamw	are there any areas people are particularly worried about wrt the test case coverage?	16:22
adamw	yup	16:22
dan408	no	16:22
* adamw gives tflink a donut		16:22
tflink	the only one I can think of is graphical upgrades, once the client is finished	16:22
adamw	we could probably add a couple other upgrade test cases if we wanted, now we don't have to test both anaconda and preupgrade	16:22
adamw	it might be nice to cover the encrypted upgrade case at least, and maybe a couple of package sets	16:23
adamw	#info adamw - maybe expand upgrade test case set a little	16:23
tflink	yeah, I think the main question is how to do that without duplicating the test case 10 times :)	16:23
adamw	:P	16:23
* dan408 proposes a wait and see atitude		16:24
tflink	but that's not a problem unique to upgrades	16:24
adamw	one thing i'd like to see but realistically may not have time to get done would be some kind of set of storage test cases	16:24
dan408	attitude*	16:24
kparal	I think some partitioning criteria could be improved, like "should not crash for invalid operations" in custom part, but not in guided part	16:24
adamw	there's no way we can cover everything, but it might be kinda nice to cover a few btrfs, raid, lvm, install-over-previous-partitions kinda thing	16:24
Viking-Ice	I think we need to separate test cases into two categories hw related and not hw related	16:24
dan408	they promised to fix a lot of things for 19	16:24
adamw	kparal: yeah, that's what tflink mentioned earlier, the partitioning criteria are kinda horrible - they're stuck in the middle of being revised, i was working on it last cycle and just never finished	16:24
* satellit liveinst still not fixed for Soas spin...: (		16:25
adamw	Viking-Ice: they're categorized already but the categories are somewhat old and we could look at revising them	16:25
Viking-Ice	there is no point in me adamw tflink dan kparal conducting the same test cases at the same similar time since the outcome can be expected to be the same unless they rely on different hw	16:25
dan408	i refuse	16:25
dan408	i want to see what they propose first	16:25
adamw	dan408: the feature for anaconda changes for f19 has already been accepted, you can check it out. there aren't any giant changes besides the re-addition of enterprise storage.	16:26
dan408	lovely	16:26
adamw	#info viking-ice - identify hw-dependent and non-hw-dependent test cases	16:26
adamw	#info kparal - finish revising the partitioning criteria	16:27
adamw	#info adamw - come up with a set of common partitioning operation test cases	16:27
adamw	lots of nice ideas there :)	16:27
adamw	any others?	16:27
dan408	how about fixing UEFI	16:27
kparal	ah, SB criteria, anyone?	16:27
tflink	fixing UEFI?	16:27
satellit	not showing dd USB booted from in anaconda	16:27
adamw	kparal: arguably covered by "The installer must boot (if appropriate) and run on all primary architectures, with all system firmware types that are common on those architectures", but maybe explicit might be better	16:28
adamw	#info kparal - explicit Secure Boot criterion?	16:28
dan408	tflink: yes	16:28
pjones	dan408: care to be a bit more specific?	16:28
adamw	kparal: that's the kind of thing we may be able to do better with the new criteria presentation if i get it right	16:28
dan408	pjones: lots of users having issues with both UEFI and secureboot installs	16:29
tflink	dan408: how is that related to criteria?	16:29
dan408	nevermind	16:29
adamw	off topic! off topic! awooga.	16:29
mjg59	dan408: They really ought to file bugs, but as noted that's not on topic	16:29
* jskladan_ sometimes hates all teh internetz providers...		16:29
adamw	man, spot the people with irc highlighting :)	16:29
Viking-Ice	kparal, nr1 test case for SB check if we have certificate that does not expire during the release life time ;)	16:29
pjones	Viking-Ice: shouldn't make any difference. validity dates in SB aren't supposed to be being checked.	16:30
adamw	okay, any more criteria ideas?	16:30
adamw	er, or test case.	16:30
Viking-Ice	pjones, ok	16:30
dan408	not really like i said play it by ear	16:30
pjones	(and the ones in the cert that signs shim aren't under our control anyway, so criteria won't really help.)	16:30
tflink	Viking-Ice: that seems a bit too specific and corner-casey to have an actual test case for it. I'm not saying it isn't an issue, just not sure it needs to be checked for every milestone's TC/RCs	16:31
adamw	okay then, moving along	16:31
adamw	oh	16:32
adamw	#info we should try and get criteria revision and test case revision done before Alpha as much as possible	16:32
adamw	#topic Fedora 19 Feature list review	16:32
dan408	https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/19/FeatureList	16:32
adamw	tflink: did you have anything prepared for this?	16:32
Viking-Ice	we somehow need to flag features we have already covered	16:33
adamw	there's a list on the agenda	16:33
adamw	https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20130204#Fedora_19_Feature_list_review	16:33
adamw	"Previous List"	16:33
Viking-Ice	adamw, the previous list is just what we thought we should keep an eye out for not all the feature we covered	16:33
Viking-Ice	as in total features we covered last week vs a slimmed list what has been approves since then	16:34
dan408	it could be totally different per feature, and with features growing massively i mean we have to decide on a few basic criterion	16:34
adamw	Viking-Ice: right, sorry, should've prepared something	16:35
tflink	adamw: nothing specific, no. just figured it would be a good thing to bring up	16:35
adamw	https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Releases/19/FeatureList&diff=321788&oldid=320463 looks like the change to FeatureList from last time	16:35
adamw	i can see a few things on there that look like good test day candidates	16:36
Viking-Ice	hmm the feature process should actually somehow tag which criteria each feature hit ( if any )	16:36
dan408	how do we test 3d printing?	16:36
adamw	dan408: we don't!	16:36
Viking-Ice	we dont	16:36
dan408	awesome!	16:36
adamw	ReplaceMySQLwithMariaDB has been discussed on-list a bit - obviously significant, we don't have much infrastructure for testing it at present	16:36
Viking-Ice	adamw, not criteria	16:36
adamw	yeah	16:37
Viking-Ice	adamw, I would say it's ours to cover criteria items it's theirs ( feature owners ) to cover what's related to their feature	16:37
adamw	Viking-Ice: well the 'criterion' to me is pretty simple - anyone using mysql in f18 should get transparently migrated to mariadb in f19 and stuff should keep working	16:37
dan408	symlinks?	16:37
adamw	Viking-Ice: well, we're not _just_ doing release validation, qa's remit is broader	16:37
adamw	dan408: the technical side isn't our problem	16:38
tflink	adamw: that sounds huge, though - how would we approach it?	16:38
adamw	but yeah, that one doesn't likely affect the criteria directly	16:38
adamw	tflink: you expect me to have *solutions*? wrong number! i only point out problems.	16:38
dan408	i cant remember the last time i ran mysql anyways	16:38
Viking-Ice	adamw, have the feature owners provides us with proper testing/debugging instruction or is that just added workload writing that for us so we can properly cover those features?	16:38
adamw	Viking-Ice: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ReplaceMySQLwithMariaDB#How_To_Test	16:39
adamw	so, not much.	16:39
tflink	I wonder if some generic mysql benchmark might work well here	16:40
adamw	#info https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ReplaceMySQLwithMariaDB is clearly a significant change but doesn't directly hit the release criteria and it's pretty hard for us to come up with a reasonably scoped test plan	16:40
tflink	ie, if the benchmark ran on both mysql and mariadb, that is a decent indication of compat.	16:40
Viking-Ice	adamw, yup we need to somehow flag "feature testing day" with only the need to point reporters to the relevant feature and follow what is instructed there	16:40
adamw	right	16:40
adamw	#info tflink - maybe if we can find a comprehensive mysql benchmark suite and check that runs, it would indicate a good level of compatibility	16:41
adamw	Viking-Ice: with the quality of 'testing instructions' we get i think having one day for that for all features would be unworkably broad :/ i think it works better to try and schedule test days for specific features of concern	16:41
adamw	we should definitely have a test day for this one for e.g.	16:41
Viking-Ice	if mariadb will replace mysql on upgrade we need to cover upgrade tests	16:41
adamw	i need to set up the test day stuff for f19 cycle, it's on my todo list for this week	16:42
adamw	Viking-Ice: it does, and yeah	16:42
adamw	i actually got mariadb in my rawhide update the other day so that part's already working in at least a simple case	16:42
Viking-Ice	you need to test it with live data	16:42
adamw	#info viking-ice - make sure we cover testing upgrade from f18 to f19 achieves the mariadb swap cleanly	16:42
Viking-Ice	samples ( live data samples )	16:43
adamw	sure	16:43
Viking-Ice	has mysql been orphaned ?	16:43
tflink	I thought that one of the issues with that proposal was the part about not allowing mysql any more	16:44
Viking-Ice	if we still ship mysql in f19 I assume this effort is not necessary	16:44
tflink	or am I getting my features confused	16:44
Viking-Ice	tflink, there where some mixed signals with that	16:44
adamw	yeah, it seems to keep changing	16:44
adamw	i don't recall precisely what fesco decided	16:44
dan408	mysql is kind of dead	16:45
Viking-Ice	on one hand oracle offered to maintain mysql on the other it look like remi hhorak wanted them to fix some issues	16:45
Viking-Ice	and they might continue to maintain that	16:45
adamw	"AGREED: Feature accepted as proposed (including obsoletion as a transition mechanism). If new MySQL maintainers appear, feature owners are asked to make it possible to install the MySQL stand-alone server (only)"	16:45
adamw	that's from the last fesco meeting.	16:45
Viking-Ice	I think that all was being decided that no one was going to be picking up mysql and maintaining it	16:46
adamw	okay, another one that pops out is Features/SystemdPredictableNetworkInterfaceNames	16:46
adamw	i believe that at least it's been agreed to make the Shiny New Scheme use em0 for most 'default onboard' devices so that won't change from biosdevname, which is a win	16:47
adamw	so i guess we should make sure that happens, and make sure the new mechanism actually works, and i guess test that whatever's supposed to happen on upgrade happens	16:47
adamw	any other things people can think of to check there?	16:47
Viking-Ice	adamw, we covered that one last meeting it would be good to get a clear statement from fesco saying we will not be releasing fedora 19 with mysql	16:47
adamw	oh sorry	16:47
adamw	Viking-Ice: you could probably just ask for clarification on the devel list there	16:47
adamw	reply to the fesco minutes post	16:48
tflink	Viking-Ice: I thought that F19 would have mysql but that it was going away for 20	16:48
adamw	Viking-Ice: ah yeah, predictable names was covered indeed.	16:48
adamw	tflink: so clearly we do need clarification :)	16:48
Viking-Ice	adamw, iptables/firewalld/arptables etc + something like libvirt might be doing something with hardcoded interface are there first thing that pop up to mind	16:48
adamw	#info if mysql is to still be available in f19, check it can be installed and used	16:48
Viking-Ice	adamw, if mysql is still available we do nothing	16:49
adamw	Viking-Ice: yeah, be good to see what happens with firewalld on upgrade	16:49
tflink	vm's might be something to look at - IIRC, it was a bit of an issue with biosdevname	16:49
Viking-Ice	adamw, if mysql is not available we do migration tests  ;)	16:49
adamw	#info on predictable network names - check behaviour of firewalld and libvirt, particularly on upgrades; check 'em0' is still used by new scheme	16:50
adamw	anyone see any other features that raise red flags?	16:50
tflink	kscreen, maybe? I assume that the kde folks will have that covered, though	16:51
adamw	worth keeping an eye on for kde validation	16:51
* satellit OEM install in anaconda (covered I think)		16:51
adamw	#info tflink - KScreen might be worth keeping an eye on for KDE validation	16:51
Viking-Ice	what about syslinux	16:51
adamw	oh, good one	16:51
adamw	#info https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SyslinuxOption also worth testing	16:52
tflink	potentially the share system certs	16:52
tflink	shared	16:52
adamw	it looks like it'll be pretty hidden, but if we have time it'd be good to check it works (syslinux)	16:52
Viking-Ice	we probably should add syslinux to criteria	16:52
adamw	Viking-Ice: i think maybe for the first release it's in there we don't need to	16:52
adamw	since it's only going to be available via kickstart or a secret anaconda parameter	16:53
adamw	it might be good as an optional test case though	16:53
Viking-Ice	well from my pov we should dot that from the start	16:53
adamw	do we really want to block the release for something that's basically a hidden feature, though?	16:53
Viking-Ice	installer	16:53
adamw	you won't be able to just pick syslinux in the installer interactively	16:54
Viking-Ice	no but ks	16:54
adamw	eh...personally i'd still vote against it as a criterion but you could draft it up for the list and see what people think	16:54
adamw	otherwise we can just test it and maybe consider bugs for freezeexception	16:55
Viking-Ice	sorry not following dont we have to cover all ks options	16:55
tflink	I don't think it was all, just a subset considered important enough to block over	16:55
adamw	right	16:55
tflink	with a yet to be determined subset	16:55
Viking-Ice	and by we I mean autoqa ( since ks snippes should be automated )	16:55
adamw	actually that's something we need to put an action item on	16:55
* satellit also USB .ks ?		16:56
adamw	we agreed in f18 validation to take kickstart stuff on case-by-case basis, but draft up a proper criterion for f19	16:56
adamw	but in general we didn't want to block on every possible kickstart option, just some subset	16:56
adamw	does someone want to take the action item for that or should I?	16:56
adamw	guess that's me then!	16:57
adamw	#action adamw to draft up a kickstart criterion for f19	16:57
adamw	#info consider whether syslinux should come in the subset of blocking kickstart options	16:57
Viking-Ice	well I think autoqa should be able to cover ks installation completely	16:57
adamw	in an ideal world, sure	16:57
tflink	Viking-Ice: feel free to submit patches	16:57
adamw	in practice, we have enough trouble keeping the simplest subset working	16:57
adamw	it's an obvious area for development for autoqa, but we can't rely on it yet	16:58
Viking-Ice	due to anaconda breakage or how autoqa is handling it	16:58
Viking-Ice	( the trouble keeping simplest subsystem working )	16:58
adamw	i dunno if anyone's looked at exactly what's not working in rats lately	16:58
adamw	we only really have tflink and kparal for autoqa and they have other things to work on too :/	16:58
kparal	last time remote syslog was broken in anaconda	16:58
kparal	anything that autoqa depends on would have to be an automatic blocker	16:59
kparal	regardless criteria	16:59
tflink	personally, I think that RATS is broken on a conceptual level, but that's me	16:59
adamw	we're getting close to our hour here	16:59
adamw	we can put followups to this on the agenda for next week if people want - any specific topics?	16:59
tflink	it's not like I have something to replace it right now	16:59
Viking-Ice	kparal, I would assume anaonda defaults the online systemd syslogger on for f19 so fetching that log should be easy via some curl magic	16:59
adamw	we've got lots of plans for autoqa work, but it all blocks on having the people to do them	17:00
tflink	what adamw said	17:00
adamw	okay, if anyone wants to add a specific topic from the above to next week's agenda, do go ahead and put it in the wiki	17:00
tflink	I can't speak for anyone else but I'd love to work on autoqa but the blocker tracking stuff is a higher priority ATM	17:00
adamw	let's finish up for this week	17:01
adamw	#topic open floor	17:01
adamw	anyone have things for open floor?	17:01
Viking-Ice	hm I probably should go ahead and file an rfe for that...	17:01
adamw	go for it	17:01
adamw	if there's nothing for open floor, setting fuse for 1 minute..hisssss	17:02
tflink	snakes?!	17:03
* tflink runs away		17:03
adamw	yesss...chase him, my pretties	17:04
adamw	ok, thanks for coming everyone!	17:04
adamw	all criteria / test case proposals welcomed if people want to work on anything that came up above :)	17:04
adamw	i may be out several days this week, btw, looking like a good snow week, so i may not get all my action items done	17:04
adamw	same time next week	17:04
adamw	#endmeeting	17:04

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.11.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!