Revision as of 18:08, 3 May 2010

Attendees

People present (lines said):

jlaska (92)
kparal (59)
maxamillion (30)
wwoods (29)
adamw (27)
jskladan (15)
skvidal (6)
zodbot (4)
Southern_Gentlem (1)
jeff_hann (1)

Regrets:

liam
rhe

Agenda

Previous meeting follow-up

current members of the 'qa' group ... apply to 'proventesters'
jlaska to follow-up w/ maxamillion after meeting

Fedora 13 RC test status

Upcoming test milestones:

2010-04-29 - Test 'Final' Test Compose -- INPROGRESS
2010-04-30 - Final Blocker Meeting (f13blocker) #3 (recap)
2010-05-05 - Final Blocker Meeting (f13blocker) #4
2010-05-06 - Test 'Final' RC

No upcoming test days:

Fedora 13 QA Retrospective
Ideas have already been coming in since F-13-Alpha. It's not too early to note QA issues you felt where handled well, or could have been improved. Your ideas will be used during F-14 QA goal planning. Voice your comments at Fedora_13_QA_Retrospective.

Proventesters check-in

The team discussed possible next steps, including ...
- Mass subscribing current qa group members to proventesters
- Updating bodhi to rely on proventesters group for critpath feedback

In order to move QA/JoinProvenTesters:Draft out of draft, what else is needed?
- need test guidelines for proventesters (something to explain why they are needed), including how to prioritize update testing
- need guidance for mentor responsibilities (manage proventesters requests, keeping documentation up to date)
  Kparal suggesting that proventesters may mentor others, within some reasonable limits, no need for special FAS group for mentors

Package Acceptance Test Plan check-in

QA:Package_Update_Acceptance_Test_Plan is no longer a draft document
Next steps ...
- Create a wiki Test Case out of each test case (see ticket#62)
- Automate package update acceptance (see [1], [2] and [3])

AutoQA check-in

Several recent AutoQA updates, including:

jskladan made progress on the autotest-id to the autoqa test front
jskladan is adding more initscript LSB compliance tests to autoqa
skvidal provided a patch to allow maintainers a way to subscribe to AutoQA test results
wwoods finalizing post-bodhi-update watcher, expects a testable watcher by end of week

Open discussion - <Your topic here>

Please help test MODIFIED and ON_QA bugs

To contribute test feedback, please help test a MODIFIED or ON_QA blocker bug (see list).

Upcoming QA events

2010-01-21 - Pre-Alpha Rawhide Acceptance Test Plan #1
2010-01-28 - Pre-Alpha Rawhide Acceptance Test Plan #2
2010-02-04 - Pre-Alpha Rawhide Acceptance Test Plan #3
2010-02-04 - NFSv4 Test Day
2010-02-05 - Alpha Blocker Meeting (F13Alpha) #1 (recap)
2010-02-11 - Test Alpha 'Test Compose' (boot media testing)
2010-02-12 - Alpha Blocker Meeting (F13Alpha) #2 (recap)
2010-02-12 - Alpha Test Candidate verification (announcement)
2010-02-18 - Alpha Release Candidate verification
2010-02-18 - Color Management test day
2010-02-19 - Alpha Blocker Meeting (F13Alpha) #3 (recap)
2010-02-24 - Alpha Go/No-Go Meeting (20:00 EST)
2010-02-25 - Yum Langpack plugin test day
2010-03-10 - Pre-Beta Acceptance Test Plan #1
2010-03-12 - Beta Blocker Meeting (F13Beta) #1 (recap)
2010-03-18 - Gnome Disk Utility Storage Test Day
2010-03-18 - Test Beta 'Test Compose' DELAYED
2010-03-19 - Beta Blocker Meeting (F13Beta) #2 (recap)
2010-03-25 - Test Beta Candidate
2010-03-25 - Printing Test Day
2010-03-26 - Beta Blocker Meeting (F13Beta) #3
2010-03-30 - SSSD by default Test Day
2010-03-31 - Beta Go/No-Go Meeting (20:00 EST)
2010-04-01 - ABRT Test Day
2010-04-08 - Virtualization Test Day
2010-04-13 - Test_Day:2010-04-13_Nouveau
2010-04-14 - Test_Day:2010-04-14_Radeon
2010-04-15 - Test_Day:2010-04-15_Intel
2010-04-16 - Final Blocker Meeting (f13blocker) #1 (recap)
2010-04-16 - Pre-RC Branched Acceptance Test Plan - DELAYED (see RHBZ #581794)
2010-04-22 - Test_Day:2010-04-22_StorageFiltering
2010-04-23 - Final Blocker Meeting (f13blocker) #2 (recap)
2010-04-29 - Test_Day:2010-04-29_Preupgrade
2010-04-29 - Test 'Final' Test Compose
2010-04-30 - Final Blocker Meeting (f13blocker) #3 (recap)
WE ARE HERE
2010-05-05 - Final Blocker Meeting (f13blocker) #4
2010-05-06 - Test 'Final' RC

Action items

jlaska to migrate approved FAS 'qa' members into 'proventesters'
jlaska to request bodhi change to require 'proventesters' feedback for critpath

IRC Transcript

jlaska	#startmeeting Fedora QA Meeting	14:59
zodbot	Meeting started Mon May 3 14:59:44 2010 UTC. The chair is jlaska. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.	14:59
zodbot	Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.	14:59
jlaska	#meetingname fedora-qa	14:59
zodbot	The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa'	14:59
jlaska	#topic Gathering critmass	14:59
* adamw gets critically massy		15:00
* kparal gets massively critical		15:00
jlaska	adamw: you're moving at a high rate of speed too, and as we all know f=m*a	15:00
jlaska	kparal: hah!	15:00
* jeff_hann here		15:00
jlaska	jeff_hann: welcome	15:01
adamw	heh	15:01
* adamw send a call out to the critical massive		15:01
* jskladan Zug Zug.		15:01
jlaska	jskladan: howdy	15:01
jlaska	wwoods: lurking?	15:01
jlaska	let's get started ... we've all got a lot on our plates	15:02
jlaska	#topic Previous meeting follow-up	15:02
adamw	om nom nom	15:02
jlaska	I only captured 2 items from last week ... and we'll touch on them later in the agenda	15:02
jlaska	so skipping those two items	15:02
jlaska	any other follow-up from last week?	15:03
jlaska	alrighty ... moving along ...	15:03
jlaska	#topic Fedora 13 RC test status	15:04
jlaska	I'm sure folks are already tuned into this topic, but just a reminder on where we are in the F13 schedule	15:04
jlaska	The F-13 Test compose was provided last Thursday, and is in test as we type	15:04
jlaska	#info F-13-Final-TC1 test results available at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Fedora_13_Final_TC_Test_Results	15:05
jlaska	many thanks to robatino for handling the announcement and wiki magic while rhe is out	15:05
kparal	the results seem very good so far	15:05
jlaska	kparal: that's great!	15:06
Southern_Gentlem	?	15:06
jlaska	preupgrade seems to still be sensative to properly recovering from low disk space	15:06
jlaska	According to the blocker bug numbers ...	15:07
jlaska	#info 32 MODIFIED	ON_QA F13Blocker bugs -- http://tinyurl.com/3ae37qy	15:07
* maxamillion is here		15:07
maxamillion	sorry I'm late	15:08
jlaska	#info 21 NEW	ASSIGNED F13Blocker bugs -- http://tinyurl.com/3567tqk	15:08
jlaska	maxamillion: no worries, you're double booked too! Welcome :)	15:08
maxamillion	thankies :)	15:08
jlaska	I know I have a large plate of bugs I need to provide test feedback on this afternoon	15:08
jlaska	and we still have 21 NEW	ASSIGNED bugs preventing the F-13-Final release candidate compose	15:08
adamw	trumpets	15:08
* wwoods lurking		15:09
jlaska	my "at risk" spidey sense is activating	15:09
jlaska	wwoods: lurk away my good man!	15:09
jlaska	#info there are no more scheduled test days for Fedora 13	15:10
* adamw is walking the blocker list atm		15:10
jlaska	so at this point, it's all about verifying your bugs, and carefully reviewing incoming issues	15:10
adamw	obviously the new/assigned bugs are the most worrying but it helps focus if we can close off as many of the ON_QA / MODIFIED ones as possible	15:10
jlaska	I'd like to do a mass update of the MODIFIED	ON_QA bugs ... just asking for updated test feedback. Do folks have any concerns about that?	15:11
jlaska	any other thoughts related to F-13-Final testing before we move on?	15:12
jlaska	#info for folks reading the recap, the F-13 QA schedule is available at http://poelstra.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-13/f-13-quality-tasks.html	15:12
jlaska	okay ... moving on to next topic ...	15:13
jlaska	#topic Proventesters check-in	15:13
jlaska	We discussed this briefly on the list last week	15:14
adamw	jlaska: please don't do a mass update	15:14
adamw	jlaska: i am doing more tailored notes on each bug as I walk	15:14
jlaska	adamw: oh no?	15:14
adamw	so it'd just be a duplication essentially	15:14
jlaska	adamw: ah excellent, I'll refrain from the mass annoy	15:14
jlaska	adamw: thx :)	15:14
jlaska	Okay, with regards to /topic	15:14
maxamillion	yeah ....	15:15
jlaska	I tried to capture what needs to happen in the short-term and then long-term	15:15
jlaska	so short-term, is it correct to say that we need to migrate 'qa' users into 'proventesters	15:15
maxamillion	jlaska: did the proventesters group become authoritative in bodhi?	15:15
jlaska	so that critpath bodhi feedback can continue?	15:15
jlaska	maxamillion: not yet, we need to have testers migrated first I believe	15:15
maxamillion	jlaska: yes, I think we need to move all curent 'qa' members into 'proventesters' so that we don't put any kind of road bumps in the way of forward QA progress in critpath	15:16
maxamillion	jlaska: ah ok	15:16
jlaska	maxamillion: dgilmore also noted that we'll need to migrate users by hand, there isn't a convenient script to mass migrating FAS users	15:16
maxamillion	jlaska: sweet	15:16
jlaska	maxamillion: I can take an action item to migrate them over today, and file a ticket against bodhi to request using 'proventesters' for critpath feedback instead	15:16
adamw	remind me to be washing my hair that day	15:16
kparal	how many members are in qa group?	15:17
maxamillion	jlaska: that would be awesome	15:17
maxamillion	kparal: quite a bit more than I had originally thought	15:17
maxamillion	kparal: I'm logging in to check now	15:17
kparal	10 members	15:17
jlaska	10 approved right?	15:18
jlaska	that's not too bad	15:18
maxamillion	oh	15:18
maxamillion	nvm	15:18
maxamillion	I thought it was a lot more than that	15:18
jlaska	maxamillion: there are a lot of unapproved requests iirc	15:18
maxamillion	ah, ok	15:18
jlaska	#action jlaska to migrate approved FAS 'qa' members into 'proventesters'	15:18
kparal	dozens of unapproved	15:18
jlaska	#action jlaska to request bodhi change to require 'proventesters' feedback for critpath	15:18
adamw	because people kept applying to the group as they thought it was important	15:19
jlaska	okay ... so once those 2 items are complete ... what's next?	15:19
kparal	guidelines for mentors?	15:19
jlaska	basically ... before we can remove https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/JoinProvenTesters:Draft from Draft	15:19
maxamillion	jlaska: that is the question ... :/	15:19
jlaska	adamw: maxamillion you both were recommending providing guidance, and being less strict about membership	15:19
kparal	guidelines for proventesters.... )	15:19
jlaska	does that mean we don't have a mentor program?	15:20
jlaska	kparal: yes!	15:20
maxamillion	kparal: +1	15:20
jlaska	#info long-term, need test guidelines for proventesters (something to explain why they are needed)	15:20
adamw	no, having mentors is fine, they do the 'providing guidance' bit. i think.	15:20
jlaska	are mentors also the group that acts on the 'proventesters' group requests?	15:21
maxamillion	jlaska: no, I like the idea of a mentor but I don't want it to be a formal checklist style mentoring, it should be more hands on	15:21
maxamillion	jlaska: yes, I think they would be	15:21
kparal	we need a document specifying how to do proventesters' work properly. because that will also help mentors do their guidance	15:21
maxamillion	kparal: agreed	15:21
jlaska	kparal: what types of things would be in that document?	15:22
jlaska	like your package update acceptance plan?	15:22
maxamillion	I like the package update acceptance plan	15:22
kparal	jlaska: basically it would tell me which package update should be tested with highest priority and what should I look at when testing them	15:23
kparal	to tell the truth, I don't even know how to test package updates myself	15:23
jlaska	ah, so how to prioritize them, and what to do with them	15:23
kparal	so some introduction into it	15:23
jlaska	#info long-term, provide guidance on how to prioritize package update testing	15:23
adamw	jlaska: i think the idea is mentors answer the group requests, yeah	15:24
jlaska	nice, anything else we need to consider?	15:24
jlaska	adamw: maxamillion: so do we need a wiki page about Mentor responsibilities?	15:24
maxamillion	I think so, yes	15:24
jlaska	#info long-term, need to outline mentor responsibilities	15:25
maxamillion	a formal "this is how to test" I think might be hard to capture but I agree with kparal that it should be done	15:25
jlaska	btw ... unless folks are chomping at the bit to take this on right now ... I'm just collecting ideas	15:25
jlaska	once the bulk of testing F-13 is behind us, we can start to divide & conquer	15:25
jlaska	yeah, I have a hard time capturing some of that stuff, but perhaps if we start with what we know and what we do now ... that'll get things moving in the right direction?	15:26
maxamillion	jlaska: agreed, and since we're going to grandfather in the current qa members who weild the critpath karma sword I think we have plenty of time	15:26
jlaska	anything else we need to think about or consider?	15:27
maxamillion	I'm sure there are, but I can't think of any right now	15:28
jlaska	do mentors need a FAS group?	15:28
jlaska	or are they just approved 'proventesters' ?	15:28
kparal	I would go the easy way	15:28
jlaska	yes please!	15:29
jlaska	:)	15:29
maxamillion	jlaska: either one I imagine would work and people who are mentors can just be kept track of in a wiki doc or something	15:29
* jlaska has a conflict starting shortly ...		15:29
kparal	proventesters may mentor others. of course supposing people are reasonable and don't start mentoring right after receiving membership	15:29
* adamw is on a very laggy line		15:29
adamw	what else is on the agenda?	15:30
kparal	adamw: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20100503	15:30
jlaska	adamw: an update from kparal on the package update acceptance test plan, AutoQA update, and open-discussion	15:30
jlaska	#chair adamw kparal	15:30
zodbot	Current chairs: adamw jlaska kparal	15:30
maxamillion	kparal: +1	15:30
maxamillion	(about the mentors bit)	15:31
jlaska	maxamillion: kparal: that seems reasonable	15:31
jlaska	okay, I think we've captured enough for now	15:31
maxamillion	+1	15:31
jlaska	#topic AutoQA check-in	15:32
kparal	#info proventesters may mentor others, within some reasonable limits, no need for special FAS group for mentors	15:32
jlaska	doh, wrong topic	15:32
jlaska	#topic Package Acceptance Test Plan check-in	15:32
jlaska	kparal: can you walk us through how things are looking on the PATP?	15:33
kparal	ok, that's gonna be short: Package Update Acceptance Test Plan has been finalized	15:33
kparal	draft status removed	15:33
jlaska	YAY!!!	15:33
kparal	it is now available here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Package_Update_Acceptance_Test_Plan	15:33
kparal	#link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Package_Update_Acceptance_Test_Plan	15:33
adamw	yaaaaaay	15:33
kparal	so now we know how to test. the thing missing is the implementation within AutoQA :)	15:34
jlaska	details shetails!	15:34
jlaska	:)	15:34
jlaska	I linked to the 3 different autoqa milestones that implement the proposed plan in a previous meeting	15:34
adamw	yeah, that'll just take a few minutes hehe	15:34
kparal	well most of the tests are already available, we just don't have the infrastructure around	15:35
jlaska	kparal: in keeping with the previous topic, do we want to also document the tests as wiki test cases/	15:36
kparal	yes, we have a ticket for it somewhere	15:37
wwoods	oh man exciting stuff.	15:37
jlaska	okay, cool!	15:37
kparal	I think I mentioned it last meeting	15:37
* kparal wonders if he should take the chair?		15:39
kparal	alright, jlaska is probably at the second meeting, let's move to another topic	15:40
jlaska	kparal: can you move us through the AUtoQA update?	15:40
kparal	so, who wants the mic?	15:41
jskladan	OK, probably on me to talk (even thought there is not much to tell)	15:41
kparal	#topic AutoQA check-in	15:41
* kparal corrects topic command :)		15:41
jskladan	last week, i've been working on the autotest-id propagation to the autotest-client	15:41
jskladan	(and subsequentely to the autoqa test)	15:42
jskladan	so we can benefit from the direct links to stored results on the Autotest-server	15:42
jskladan	hopefully the patch will be in upstream until the end of the week	15:42
wwoods	so when a test finishes we actually have a link back to all the logs and everything, so we don't need to include so much junk in the email?	15:43
jskladan	yes	15:43
wwoods	just making sure	15:43
wwoods	heh	15:43
kparal	for example we can send just a summary/highlights in the email and link to the full results	15:43
jskladan	hehe	15:43
jskladan	other that that, i'm adding more LSB-compliancy check for initscripts	15:44
wwoods	thanks for taking the lead on that one - I tried and failed to get that to work a while back	15:44
* jskladan steals all the stuff from the RHEL guys :)		15:44
jskladan	other than that, jlaska told me, that he'll be packaging autoqa next week	15:45
jskladan	so hopefully the functionality will be on the production server soon :)	15:45
jskladan	any other updates from you guys?	15:45
wwoods	jlaska has been working on visualizing the dependency graph needed for autoqa	15:45
wwoods	it's terrifying	15:45
wwoods	we're probably going to need to have a FAD with some Java packagers if we're expecting to get the entire thing accepted into Fedora	15:46
kparal	well it's java, it is terrifying :)	15:46
wwoods	indeed.	15:46
wwoods	I've got a quick update on autoqa	15:46
* kparal takes the mic		15:46
jlaska	we had a FAD in planning, but that's going to be rescheduled and go through planning again after F-13 is out the door	15:46
kparal	oh sorry	15:46
wwoods	but kparal is the chair, so I'll wait for him to hand off the mic	15:46
wwoods	heh	15:46
kparal	alrighty	15:47
maxamillion	there are still java packagers around? .... I thought when dbhole orphaned half the java stack we were in trouble :/	15:47
kparal	so last week I spent a little time on skvidal's patch which he posted into our ML	15:47
wwoods	ah, that's what I was going to talk about too	15:47
jskladan	#info jskladan made progress on the autotest-id to the autoqa test front	15:47
kparal	it should allow us to sent emails directly to package maintainers that are subscribed to receive it	15:47
jskladan	#info jskladan is adding more initscript LSB compliance tests to autoqa	15:48
kparal	there were few bugs and I think we will need some library functions tweaks, but it should be done pretty quickly	15:48
wwoods	it's a per-package thing - maintainers can opt-in to getting email from rpmguard whenever it runs for certain packages	15:48
kparal	I would like to post tested patch this week	15:48
skvidal	kparal: I sent a second patch	15:48
wwoods	we will probably want to document the opt-in procedure for interested maintainers	15:49
kparal	skvidal: I know, I haven't seen it yet unfortunately	15:49
skvidal	kparal: ?	15:49
kparal	skvidal: but many thanks for your work	15:49
skvidal	kparal: you didn't receive it?	15:49
kparal	skvidal: received, but not reviewed :)	15:49
skvidal	oh okay	15:49
wwoods	and note that this is a temporary hack, to be used until resultsdb is able to handle this kind of thing	15:49
kparal	and then we can expect many complaints about the contents :)	15:50
skvidal	which is sorta the point	15:50
skvidal	it'll help field what can be filtered later	15:50
kparal	#info skvidal's patch should allow AutoQA to send direct emails to subscribed package maintainers	15:51
kparal	ok, anything else from AutoQA?	15:51
wwoods	one other thing	15:51
kparal	go ahead	15:51
wwoods	I'm still working on the post-bodhi-update watcher/hook - there are some limitations of the current bodhi design that make it tricky for us to do what we want	15:52
wwoods	but I think I've got the design all worked out now	15:52
adamw	sorry, my connect died	15:52
wwoods	hopefully I will have it testable by the end of this week (so long as administrative things don't get in the way)	15:52
wwoods	I'm also trying to write a big blog post to explain the depcheck test and why it's so hard	15:53
wwoods	heh	15:53
* kparal looking forward		15:53
wwoods	I'm trying to keep notes on things that would make the post-bodhi-update watcher/hook easier to implement, so we can make sure that stuff gets put into the design of bodhi2	15:53
wwoods	(without bugging lmacken too much)	15:54
wwoods	but yeah, keep your fingers crossed for some visible progress on that stuff.	15:54
wwoods	that's all from me.	15:54
kparal	ok, thanks wwoods	15:55
kparal	as far as I see, we have open floor now	15:55
kparal	#topic Open discussion - <Your topic here>	15:55
kparal	anything you want to discuss?	15:56
jlaska	kparal: nothing here, thank you for driving while I'm distracted :)	15:56
* adamw just focussing on blockers		15:56
adamw	please everyone test some on_qa/modified, there's several anyone could test	15:57
kparal	#info please test on_qa/modified bugs, there's several anyone could test	15:57
adamw	thanks	15:57
wwoods	link to the list?	15:58
wwoods	(for lazyboneses such as myself)	15:58
kparal	is this link correct? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=507681&hide_resolved=1	15:58
kparal	I know jlaska had two different links while back, but I think it should be the same	15:59
kparal	#link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=507681&hide_resolved=1	15:59
adamw	that's all blockers	16:00
adamw	i'll try and send out a mail later flagging up bugs that anyone can test	16:00
adamw	i'm making a list	16:00
kparal	#info adamw will send a list of easily testable important bugs	16:00
adamw	hey hey hey, you just VASTLY upgraded my 'try' ;)	16:01
kparal	adamw: now you have an action item :)	16:01
adamw	hehe	16:01
kparal	alright, one hour precisely	16:01
kparal	if you don't have anything else on mind...	16:02
kparal	thanks all for attending!	16:02
kparal	#endmeeting	16:02

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

Search

QA/Meetings/20100503: Difference between revisions