Revision as of 19:34, 3 January 2011

Attendees

People present (lines said)

Unable to attend:

Rhe (hopefully sleeping)
Hongqing (hopefully sleeping)

Agenda

Previous meeting follow-up

Bodhi feedback patch from fcami (see infrastructure ticket#701 awaiting review

No updates on https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/bodhi/2010-December/000543.html

Call for Test Days

Owner: AdamW
Summary: Call for ideas/owners for Fedora 15 QA/Test_Days; Monitor list of approved features for ideas; Several events scheduled so far (GNOME 3, Xfce 4.8 and X Test Week); Hurry and Alam scheduled another l10n/i18n test day (see https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/158)
Next steps ...

Schedule systemd event?
HELP - Approaching last call to pitch (or host) test days for Fedora 15.
Reach out to xorg-x11-drv maintainers to see if they want to move the test week at all

Requirements review for Fedora test case management

Owner: rhe
Summary: See fedora-qa ticket#152 -- Requirements review for Fedora test case management; Hurry drafting requirements at Rhe/tcms_requirements_proposal; Use case identification -- see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Rhe/tcms_use_cases; Use case comparison -- see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Rhe/tcms_Comparison
Next steps ...: HELP - More feedback needed from testers (anyone who has participated or hosted an installation test event or test day)

Critical Path test case development

Owner: adamwill
Summary: See fedora-qa ticket#154; Still experimenting with some mock-ups/examples
Next steps ...: HELP - More feedback needed from testers and developers; If no additional feedback, and we assume no news is good news, the next step is converting existing test cases, and getting people started writing new ones developed; Reach out to f-e-k and bodhi teams to discuss tools integration

AutoQA Update

Owner: kparal
Summary: Kparal pushed mkrizek's support for staging server into master
Next steps ...

What's the status of depcheck?
1. Wwoods posting blog article explaining the need for autoqa ticket#248
2. Determine appropriate strategy for watcher and depcheck integration, and revise patchset as needed
Merge clumens branch into master

Open discussion - <Your topic here>

Suggestions for improving IRC meetings

Owner - jlaska

Summary

Jlaska asked for ideas/thoughts on improving IRC meetings

Suggestions included ...

Merge BugZappers and QA meetings
Post and solicit meeting topics on Friday, conditionally host meetings on Monday

Next steps ...: Will post and solicit topics on Friday; No current action, but open to merging BugZapper and QA meetings in the future

Action items

IRC Transcript

jlaska	#startmeeting Fedora QA Meeting	16:00
zodbot	Meeting started Mon Jan 3 16:00:00 2011 UTC. The chair is jlaska. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.	16:00
zodbot	Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.	16:00
jlaska	#meetingname fedora-qa	16:00
zodbot	The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa'	16:00
jlaska	#topic Gathering in the lobby	16:00
* kparal welcome		16:00
jlaska	Happy 2011 fedora-qa! Who is ready to join me hosting the first awesome meeting of 2011?	16:01
* jskladan_home is lurking from the shadows, but will be departing soon :-/		16:01
jlaska	howdy jskladan and kparal	16:01
jlaska	mkrizek is out this week, so hopefully he's hitting the books hard	16:02
jlaska	and wwoods is now fully transitioned over to anaconda-devel	16:02
wwoods	well, I'm still lurking here	16:03
* rbergeron peeks in		16:03
wwoods	but unofficially!	16:03
jlaska	Anyone else lurking? Viking-Ice, robatino, adamw etc...	16:03
jlaska	rbergeron: hi there :)	16:04
rbergeron	jlaska: howdy sir!	16:04
kparal	I think adamw has holiday, if he's in Canada	16:04
* Viking-Ice drops in Happy New year ;)		16:04
jlaska	oh goodness, my gnome-shell session just froze .... one moment while I recover folks	16:06
jlaska	apologies for delay	16:06
jlaska	okay ... we'll run this from the console then ...	16:06
jlaska	#topic Previous meeting follow-up	16:07
jlaska	The only item I had on the list was tracking the bodhi patch that fcame sent out for review	16:07
jlaska	kparal: thanks, I didn't realize today was a holiday in Canada	16:08
jlaska	I haven't seen any updates in the ticket. I have it listed as infrastructure ticket#701, but I think I must have typo'd that from a previous meeting	16:10
jlaska	Will likely need to catch up with fcami and lmacken for an update here	16:10
jlaska	So ... into the agenda ...	16:11
jlaska	Nothing earth shattering planned for today ... just a recap on current activities so we don't completely forget what we were working on	16:11
jlaska	#topic Fedora 15 Test Days	16:11
jlaska	The schedule looks pretty good so far	16:11
jlaska	The open items I have are that AdamW was waiting to hear back from mezcalero on the timing of a systemd test day	16:12
jlaska	Aside from that ... there are still a handfull of open slots remaining (7 slots)	16:12
jlaska	we don't have to have each of these filled of course, and as AdamW notes, while they are typically held on Thursdays ... folks are certainly welcome to choose a more applicable day of the week	16:13
rbergeron	jlaska: does the QA team normally have these test days individually added / detailed on the Fedora schedule?	16:13
Viking-Ice	If they suddenly will get filed we might need to drop some of those Gnome-Shell event I think I saw AdamW marked three testdays dedicated to Gnome-shell..	16:14
jlaska	rbergeron: no, we've debated adding them to the official schedule, but given the dynamic nature of the test day slots ... we've held off on doing that	16:14
jlaska	Viking-Ice: that'll be a good problem to have! Too many people interested in hosting events :)	16:14
Viking-Ice	hehe ;)	16:14
jlaska	I understand that the 3 gnome-shell events lines up with what was requested on @desktop list and based on feedback from some of the upstream GNOME QA folks	16:15
jlaska	rbergeron: does that answer your q?	16:15
rbergeron	jlaska: indeed.	16:15
* jlaska trying to figure out how to cut'n'paste links from `links`		16:15
jlaska	#info If anyone has topic suggestions, or would like to host an event, please reach out on test@lists.fedoraproject.org	16:16
Viking-Ice	Has not experience tough us not being hosting *DE test days until after alpha just before beta + I think we would need to host the systemd test day before Gnome-shell one	16:16
jlaska	#link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Fedora_15_test_days	16:16
Viking-Ice	perhaps all the graphics card related once as well ( Intel Radeon Nouveaou )	16:17
jlaska	Viking-Ice: definitely! I know that idea came up with regards to priorizing the xorg-x11-drv* stuff before the shell events	16:17
Viking-Ice	yeah I think systemd should be there as well	16:18
jlaska	okay	16:18
jlaska	#info Viking-Ice suggested that systemd and xorg-x11-drv-* test days should be scheduled before gnome-shell events	16:18
jlaska	anything else on the test day topic?	16:18
jlaska	Alright ...	16:20
jlaska	#topic Fedora TCMS use case review	16:20
jlaska	Just a quick heads up on some of the work Hurry has been doing ...	16:20
jlaska	#link http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/152	16:20
jlaska	She has drafted 2 new pages ...	16:20
jlaska	#link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Rhe/tcms_use_cases - to list all of our current test management use cases	16:21
jlaska	#link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Rhe/tcms_Comparison - Comparison of the features of the different use cases	16:21
jlaska	I find that second document very readible ... but I like tables and colors :)	16:21
jlaska	As always, I'm sure any ideas or suggestions to help Hurry move forward on this subject would be appreciated	16:22
Viking-Ice	I prefer the tables and colors as well	16:23
jlaska	I believe the first goal is to identify and document all current uses of the wiki for test management (cases, plans and results)	16:23
adamw	hiya	16:23
adamw	sorry, lunch overran...	16:23
jlaska	from there, and I'm not sure of the order, to identify which features are present in nitrate, and to prioritize the missing features so they are on the nitrate development roadmap	16:24
jlaska	adamw: hi there!	16:24
jlaska	Viking-Ice: okay	16:24
jlaska	adamw: no worries, we actually thought you were on holiday today	16:24
* jlaska suspects this is all part of the adamw beach beverage plan		16:24
jlaska	good timing though ...	16:25
adamw	wasn't sure if we were supposed to be on holiday or not	16:25
jlaska	#topic CritPath Test Case development	16:25
jlaska	#link http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/154	16:25
jlaska	adamw: I'm still coming up to speed on your latest here, but it looks like you have some new drafts/mock-ups?	16:25
adamw	well, just what i did right before xmas	16:26
adamw	they're not new, exactly, i just picked a set of existing test cases and converted them to the new naming scheme as an exampke	16:26
jlaska	I'm cut'n'paste deficient at the moment ... got any handy links?	16:26
adamw	you can drill down from https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Test_Cases to see how it works	16:27
adamw	to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Package_xorg-x11-drv-ati_test_cases and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Critical_path_test_cases	16:27
jlaska	nice!	16:27
jlaska	I still have a few unread updates from you on the subject, I'll try to respond and clarify and comments shortly	16:28
jlaska	any other updates or next steps you want to share?	16:28
adamw	well, i was kinda hoping for some feedback over xmas break, but haven't seen any	16:29
adamw	if we assume no news is good news then next step is simply continuing to convert existing test cases, and getting people started writing new ones	16:30
jlaska	#help Feedback on ticket#152 and ticket#154 needed	16:30
adamw	then talking to the tool devs	16:30
jlaska	#info Need more feedback from testers/developers	16:30
jlaska	sounds great, thanks adamw	16:30
jlaska	#topic AutoQA Updates	16:31
kparal	ah	16:31
jlaska	kparal: what's the latest? Do we have a holiday easter egg implanted in autoqa now? :)	16:31
kparal	I don't really have anything prepared for today. I must admit I haven't been working on autoqa over christmas :)	16:32
jskladan_home	neither have I	16:32
* jskladan_home blushes		16:32
kparal	but today I pushed to master mkrizek's support for staging server	16:32
jlaska	good for you guys!	16:32
kparal	so at least mkrizek deserves kudos	16:32
jlaska	heh ... already mkrizek :)	16:32
jlaska	kparal: in general, how are things looking for the next %{version} of autoqa?	16:33
jlaska	or is it too soon to tell?	16:33
kparal	well, I am not sure how it looks about depcheck	16:34
kparal	I am sure we can adjust the koji watcher in time	16:34
kparal	I believe the next release should occur this month	16:35
jlaska	cool! I'm not sure on the status of depcheck either, I started a thread with wwoods on that topic, so hopefully we'll know more soon.	16:35
jlaska	clumens and I finished up some work on his private branch, which includes a new installer test called 'compose-tree' that does a pungi test whenever a new anaconda is built in koji	16:36
jlaska	I also have a preliminary git-post-receive hook (along with companion .wsgi app) to allow us to trigger tests based on 'git push's	16:37
kparal	sounds great	16:37
kparal	what's the wsgi app for?	16:38
jlaska	the wsgi app is how the git-watcher triggers tests on the autoqa server	16:38
kparal	ok	16:38
jlaska	I'll have to document this in more detail of course, I took a stab at a long README in the hook directory for this	16:38
jlaska	but I'm sure it'll need more docs	16:38
jlaska	oh, I should also mention that Hongqing Yang joined the group in Beijing. He's tasked with coming up to speed on our installation testing and looking for areas to automate	16:40
jlaska	alright ... open-discussion time ...	16:40
jlaska	#topic Open discussion - <your topic here>	16:40
jlaska	quick topic for rbergeron ... are there any open items related to QA and the F15 schedule?	16:40
kparal	jlaska: does that mean that Honqging will cooperate with clumens or will it be a separate task?	16:41
jlaska	kparal: unsure at this time ... they may end up converging, but the initial scope is somewhat different	16:41
jlaska	Another question for everyone ...	16:42
jlaska	#info Are there any suggestions/ideas on how we can make our weekly meetings more effective?	16:42
Viking-Ice	Merge Bug Zappers meetings with this one	16:43
jlaska	Change the format, change the frequency, rotate meeting chair, More open to topic submissions etc...	16:43
jlaska	Viking-Ice: that's an idea ... hmmm	16:43
kparal	it depends what 'more effective' means... shorter? :)	16:43
jlaska	kparal: to me, more effective means it served a purpose, and we all found it a valuable use of our time	16:44
adamw	do we think it's currently ineffective?	16:44
jlaska	and shorter would be nice!	16:44
Viking-Ice	posting the topics with a bit more advance then hour before meeting ;)	16:44
jlaska	adamw: I don't think it's ineffective, but I think it could be more effective	16:44
jlaska	Viking-Ice: that's always something I struggle with ... indeed, I could do a better job of that	16:44
adamw	do 'em on friday	16:44
adamw	put them on a wiki page people can edit	16:45
jlaska	the meetings, or the agenda?	16:45
adamw	agenda	16:45
jlaska	hmm, likey	16:45
jlaska	that might facilitate more topic suggestions	16:45
adamw	that's how we do/did it for bugzappers, it works fine when people actually have things to contribute	16:45
adamw	in fact it was just a rolling list	16:45
* jlaska would like to stop carrying all the topics		16:45
adamw	whoever does the meeting announcement grabs everything off the list and puts it in	16:45
jlaska	well, that's a quick fix I can implement for the next meeting ... thanks!	16:46
jlaska	following that idea ... if there are no topic submissions, is it acceptable to not have a meeting?	16:47
adamw	fine by me.	16:47
jlaska	is it bad if we go 2/3/4 weeks without a meeting? I would think that means we have a problem somewhere, no?	16:47
Viking-Ice	I think the bug zappers meeting should be merged with this one	16:47
adamw	but we have some recurring topics at present which would cause that to be very unlikely.	16:47
jlaska	#topic Improve QA meetings	16:48
jlaska	#info idea - Merge BugZappers and QA meetings	16:48
jlaska	#info idea - Post and solicit meeting topics on Friday, conditionally host meetings on Monday	16:48
kparal	I have just a slight idea how BugZappers meeting look like. but keeping it separate looks more reasonable to me	16:48
Viking-Ice	why ?	16:49
jlaska	Viking-Ice: sounds like we should also raise this for discussion on the next BugZapper meeting?	16:49
kparal	Viking-Ice: because going over proposed bugs is outside of my usual tasks	16:49
Viking-Ice	yeah it was them that split of the process from QA in the first place so they might not like it so much	16:50
jlaska	Viking-Ice: I wouldn't completely kill the idea, but seems worth more info/exploration	16:50
adamw	kparal: that's not what happens in bugzappers meetings	16:50
kparal	adamw: ah, ok. so first I should attend one, before speaking, sorry :)	16:51
Viking-Ice	having one meeting for the whole QA community is what I'm after it will alow reporters to be a bit more aware of what's happening on that side	16:51
adamw	kparal: you can see logs at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/bugzappers/ if you like	16:51
Viking-Ice	I personally never attend any "BugZappers" meeting	16:51
adamw	we haven't actually had many bugzappers meetings at all lately so it's somewhat academic	16:51
jlaska	Well, by being more transparent with collecting meeting topics for this meeting, we can certainly encourage more BugZapper participation	16:52
jlaska	if the meetings consistently go over 1 hour in length, I would probably have to shoot myself	16:53
jlaska	That'd be my personal goal :)	16:53
Viking-Ice	from my stand point we all work as one group or we split of QE in their corners bugzapper in theirs and reporters in their corners	16:53
kparal	after reading the logs, it doesn't seem so bad. taking back my statement :)	16:53
jlaska	Viking-Ice: let's start the discussion with the bugzappers ... see what they think	16:54
jlaska	I don't think it's as black and white as you articulate (QA vs BugZappers) ... but I'm open to combining the meetings	16:54
jlaska	for this week, I'll adjust the meeting topic process.	16:55
adamw	can we go back to test days, since I missed that bit of the meeting?	16:55
jlaska	sure ... you got 4 minutes :)	16:56
jlaska	#topic Fedora 15 Test Days	16:56
jlaska	adamw: any updates/topics/cautionary_tales to add?	16:56
adamw	just to say the ordering of the test days i've put in so far isn't just me throwing stuff at a wall	16:56
adamw	the gnome test day schedule is based on me talking to the desktop team, that's the schedule they want	16:56
* jlaska nods		16:56
adamw	we don't need to do the systemd test day before the gnome3 test days unless we're particularly scared that zillions of people will be unable to boot f15, which by all current experience isn't the caes	16:57
Viking-Ice	I propose xorg-x11-drv test and systemd before first gnome-shell test	16:57
adamw	we can't do that, practically speaking	16:57
Viking-Ice	why	16:57
adamw	wouldn't be enough time for everything	16:57
Viking-Ice	?	16:58
adamw	systemd and xorg devs don't want their test days really early	16:58
adamw	especially for xorg, it'd mean we were testing code with little relevance to what we were actually going to ship	16:58
jlaska	Viking-Ice: it sounds like current schedule was developed in conjunction with desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org ... /me searches for desktop@ link	16:59
Viking-Ice	yeah well we have had problems in the past with the X not being in good enough shape before *DE tests when hosting DE before the X tests	16:59
adamw	the only particular benefit of doing them before gnome3 test days is if we're really worried systemd or x drivers are going to cause lots of people to be unable to get into gnome3, yes? at present that doesn't look like it'd be the case	16:59
adamw	jlaska: most of the discussion was on irc, but i can provide a log if anyone wants (i'd have to check with mclasen first as it was in /query)	16:59
jlaska	Viking-Ice: I don't have a lot of data on the retrospective pages about people being unable to test desktop environments due to a large number of xorg-x11-drv issues	16:59
Viking-Ice	F8 and F9 X changes and radeon	17:00
jlaska	That's when we introduced modesetting for the first time, right?	17:01
Viking-Ice	yeah	17:01
adamw	we could move X up to late february, but i'd have to check with the X devs	17:01
jlaska	okay	17:01
jlaska	I don't think we're in the same boat with regards to disruptive core xorg-x11-drv-* changes like we were when modesetting landed	17:01
adamw	systemd really doesn't worry me, we've had people using it for quite a long time now and it really hasn't presented any problems	17:01
adamw	the systemd test day will be 'polishing advanced use cases' not 'omg does this thing work', i think	17:02
Viking-Ice	adamw: not on fresh install I dont think it's the same with upgrades. . .	17:02
adamw	Viking-Ice: that's fine. we don't get many people doing upgrades for test days.	17:02
jlaska	alright, we've exceeded the one hour limit ... let's start to wrap-up	17:02
jlaska	so summary ...	17:02
jlaska	* reach out to xorg devs to see if there is any wiggle room for the Xorg Test Week?	17:03
jlaska	* Add upgrades to the list of use cases to explore during systemd test day?	17:03
jlaska	</proposed>	17:03
jlaska	adamw: Viking-Ice: that sound right?	17:04
adamw	sure	17:04
Viking-Ice	yup	17:04
jlaska	eggsellent	17:04
jlaska	okay folks ... let's close out unless there are any other topics	17:04
jlaska	#topic Open Discussion - <your topic here>	17:04
* jlaska sets the fuse for 1 minute		17:05
jlaska	15 seconds...	17:05
jlaska	Thanks for your time everyone!	17:06
jlaska	I'll follow-up with minutes to the list	17:06
jlaska	#endmeeting	17:06

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

Search

QA/Meetings/20110103: Difference between revisions