From Fedora Project Wiki
Attendees
People present (lines said)
- jlaska (174)
- wwoods (52)
- Oxf13 (52)
- adamw (50)
- kparal (28)
- Viking-Ice (13)
- Southern_Gentlem (11)
- lili_ (10)
- nirik (10)
- zodbot (8)
- mcepl (3)
- buggbot (2)
- mbonnet (2)
- notting (1)
- Jeff_S (1)
Regrets:
- He Rui (rhe)
Agenda
Preview Meeting follow-up
QA/Meetings/20091012#Action_items
- jlaska will investigate the 5 anaconda F12Beta issues to determine when the failures were introduced
INPRGRESS - Adam Williamson posted feedback during the beta release readiness meeting 36 issues were marked as beta blockers prior to freeze, 16 after the freeze.. I am manually inspecting the bugs added to the blocker list after the freeze (Sept 31) to determine if there is a pattern. So far, only 2 bugs took longer than 2 days to be escalated to the F12Beta blocker list. More manual fiddling required
- jlaska to investigate packaging of israwhidebroken.com for production instance
Packaged thanks to python setuptools. Need to determine whether to incorporate into autoqa now. Wwoods had the suggestion of creating a autoqa/front-ends directory to include this and other "Is <component> broken?" front-ends.
- jlaska to request autoqa-devel@ for autoqa development discussion and patch review
https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1733
Beta test review
Jlaska asked the group for feedback on what worked and what needs improvement for how the team tracks blocker bugs and organizes testing.
AutoQA Updates from wwoods and kparal
rpmguard
How_to_Debug_<component> Update from Viking-Ice
Rjune assisted adamw in testing the use of a wiki template for future debugging pages
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Dracut_problems2
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Template:How_to_debug2
Adamw asked if someone would like to rename the existing Category:Debugging pages to use the new format: How to debug <component> problems. Adamw also suggested changing the back-links to avoid double redirect issues on the wiki. Jlaska agreed to rename the pages.
Open floor - <your topic here>
CritPath testing
Oxf13 asked for extra eyes/fingers as crit-path tag requests come in for final. Adam asked whether the process for requesting a post-Beta tag was documented.
Common_F12_Bugs
Adamw reminded the group, if you're aware of any bug that's in the released beta images that you think should be documented there, please either add it (there's guidelines on layout in the wiki page source) or add the 'CommonBugs' keyword to the bug report.
rats_install still failing
Jlaska asked if there were any updates on the download.fedora.devel.redhat.com rsync from download.fedoraproject.org. It appears autoqa rats_install results are still failing due to bad content on the download site (see https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/autoqa-results/2009-October/001654.html).
F-12 Talking Awesomeness talking points
Adamw recommended F12_Beta_Announcement for folks looking for talking points about what's new in Fedora 12.
Upcoming QA events
- 2009-10-12 - F12 Beta go/no_go meeting (@ 18:00pm - rel-eng meeting)
- 2009-10-13 - BugZappers/Meetings
- 2009-10-14 - Beta Project Wide Release Readiness Meeting
- 2009-10-15 - i18n Test Day
Action items
- jlaska to rename other debug pages (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Debugging) to be consistent with "How to debug <component> problems". Update back-links also
IRC transcript
| jlaska | #startmeeting Fedora QA Meeting | 15:58 |
|---|---|---|
| zodbot | Meeting started Mon Oct 19 15:58:44 2009 UTC. The chair is jlaska. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 15:58 |
| zodbot | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. | 15:58 |
| jlaska | #topic gathering in the lobby | 15:58 |
| * kparal is here | 15:58 | |
| Southern_Gentlem | .fas jbwillia | 15:59 |
| zodbot | Southern_Gentlem: jbwillia 'Ben Williams' <vaioof@yahoo.com> - jbwilliams 'Jason Williams' <jb.williams@tiscali.co.uk> | 15:59 |
| jlaska | welcome kparal and Southern_Gentlem | 15:59 |
| jlaska | I believe we are joined by lili for the first time today? | 15:59 |
| kparal | oh, what's the time for him? | 15:59 |
| jlaska | LATE! :) | 16:00 |
| kparal | exactly midnight in bejing, if i see right | 16:00 |
| lili_ | deep night :) | 16:00 |
| jlaska | wwoods: adamw: you guys in lurk mode? | 16:00 |
| adamw | morningh | 16:00 |
| * wwoods lurking, may need to leave early on an errand | 16:01 | |
| jlaska | adamw: wwoods: howdy gents | 16:01 |
| jlaska | we've got a busy agenda today ... so I'm going to just start moving | 16:01 |
| jlaska | feel free to stop me or slow me down if there any points missed | 16:02 |
| jlaska | and again ... thanks for staying up late and joining us Liam :) | 16:02 |
| lili_ | I am ok, :) | 16:02 |
| jlaska | I'll be walking through the proposed agenda - https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-October/msg00382.html | 16:02 |
| jlaska | starting with ... | 16:03 |
| jlaska | #topic Previous meeting follow-up | 16:03 |
| jlaska | Oxf13 raised some concerns in the last meeting that QA was finding blocker bugs too late after the freeze | 16:03 |
| Oxf13 | I'm here, sorry having some irc issues | 16:04 |
| jlaska | Oxf13: hi there! | 16:04 |
| jlaska | adamw has a clever+simple solution to scrubbing the blocker list ... just use the blocker bug history | 16:04 |
| jlaska | (instead of a complicated bz boolean search) | 16:04 |
| jlaska | #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_activity.cgi?id=507678 | 16:04 |
| jlaska | if I can quote adamw from the meeting ... | 16:05 |
| jlaska | #info "36 issues were marked as beta blockers prior to freeze, 16 after the freeze." -adamw | 16:05 |
| jlaska | what I'm trying to find out is if there was significant delay in finding and escalating | 16:05 |
| Oxf13 | brb | 16:05 |
| jlaska | so far, only one bug on the blocker list has more then 2 days between filing and escalating | 16:06 |
| jlaska | that's not bad ... imo | 16:06 |
| jlaska | I'm still looking, and I'd really like if I could use python-bugzilla to make it easier to perform this query in the future, but for now ... it's manual | 16:06 |
| jlaska | bug#523862 was found during the StorageRewrite test day that rhe organized, but not escalated until 10-02 ... that's the only one that looks like we could have escalated sooner had the impact been known | 16:07 |
| buggbot | Bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=523862 urgent, low, ---, dledford, CLOSED RAWHIDE, mdadm craps at boot | 16:07 |
| * Viking-Ice sneaks in from one meeting to another.. | 16:07 | |
| jlaska | so ... summary from me is I'm still looking for a trend that we can address in future testing, but I feel like we covered this well with test days and lili's test runs | 16:07 |
| jlaska | Viking-Ice: howdy | 16:07 |
| jlaska | #info jlaska manually inspecting F12Beta change history to see if any trends / problems exist in how we escalate blocker bugs | 16:08 |
| jlaska | Next up ... | 16:08 |
| jlaska | * jlaska to investigate packaging of israwhidebroken.com for production instance | 16:08 |
| jlaska | this was really easy, wwoods did the hard work already here | 16:08 |
| jlaska | we can talk more about it in the autoqa section, but israwhidebroken.git already uses setuputils | 16:09 |
| jlaska | so it was a simple matter of python setup.py bdist_rpm
|
16:09 |
| jlaska | Now I just need to follow through with wwoods idea of adding a "autoqa/front-ends/" directory to house this content | 16:09 |
| wwoods | yeah that's easy enough | 16:09 |
| jlaska | wwoods: once this next action item gets done ... I'll send updates that route ... | 16:10 |
| jlaska | * jlaska to request autoqa-devel@ for autoqa development discussion and patch review | 16:10 |
| wwoods | now that we know how to get it packaged/installed properly we make it a subpackage of autoqa if we like | 16:10 |
| jlaska | #info autoqa-devel mailing list has been requested - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1733 | 16:10 |
| jlaska | wwoods: I _definitely_ would appreciate some patch review for anything I touch! | 16:10 |
| jlaska | so I'd like to get my changes out to the list for comments/feedback | 16:10 |
| jlaska | I usually beg jds2001 for help with creating mailing lists, but if someone knows another contact who can assist on the infrastructure team? | 16:11 |
| jlaska | #help New mailing list requested for autoqa development discussion - see https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1733 | 16:11 |
| jlaska | okay ... any other follow-up actions from last week that I missed? | 16:12 |
| jlaska | if not ... I'll start with #2 on https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-October/msg00382.html | 16:12 |
| jlaska | #topic Beta test review | 16:12 |
| jlaska | As we did for the Alpha, I'd like to spend a moment on the Beta | 16:13 |
| jlaska | what worked, what didn't, what could be improved | 16:13 |
| jlaska | lili_: thank you for sending out the test run summary | 16:13 |
| jlaska | #link https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-October/msg00303.html | 16:13 |
| jlaska | lili_: do you have any thoughts to share on what worked well, or what you would like to see improved next time? | 16:13 |
| lili_ | what I am thinking is how to complete the test cases that still did not complete on test results | 16:14 |
| jlaska | lili_: so a way to get to 100% executed in the test matrix? | 16:15 |
| lili_ | some cases have to run on some special hardware, like efi | 16:15 |
| jlaska | #info Fedora 12 Beta Install test matrix - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_12_Beta_RC2_Install | 16:15 |
| lili_ | at least to finish all the tire 2 test cases according to our test plan | 16:16 |
| jlaska | lili_: well, on the good news front, if you sort by test priority ... I believe all tier#1 tests are executed. That's a positive! | 16:16 |
| Southern_Gentlem | lili_, also look at http://spins.fedoraunity.org/Members/Southern_Gentleman/Fedora%2012%20%20beta%20TestMatrix as well | 16:16 |
| jlaska | #info Southern_Gentlem directed the team towards a different test matrix - http://spins.fedoraunity.org/Members/Southern_Gentleman/Fedora%2012%20%20beta%20TestMatrix | 16:16 |
| jlaska | lili_: what if we run fewer tests? | 16:16 |
| lili_ | that will reduce our quality? | 16:17 |
| jlaska | excellent question to ask ... I'm not certain of the answer | 16:18 |
| Jeff_S | that's quite hard to quantify | 16:18 |
| jlaska | obvious, we'd want to make the most efficient use of our testing time, so if there is any duplication ... perhaps that's an area to reduce | 16:18 |
| adamw | i should quickly note that, although we didn't put it in the matrix, i did have the Golden Trifecta of video adapters here for the last few weeks (radeon, nvidia, intel) and verified the beta at least basically worked on all three of my test systems. | 16:18 |
| jlaska | #info lili asked if reducing the number of test cases would reduce quality | 16:19 |
| jlaska | Some ways I can think of getting more complete results in the test matrix is by more testers, automation or reducing the matrix | 16:20 |
| jlaska | lili_: have a look at Southern_Gentlem's matrix ... he has some interesting tests | 16:20 |
| jlaska | Southern_Gentlem: would you be interested in seeing your tests become wiki test cases that we can both link to and use? | 16:20 |
| Southern_Gentlem | fine with me | 16:21 |
| jlaska | adamw: you've always been a fan of the installer matrix ... do you have any thoughts on how we can get to a more complete test results into the matrix? | 16:21 |
| jlaska | Southern_Gentlem: no sense in us duplicating effort if we can avoid it | 16:22 |
| adamw | i think it's pretty overwhelming, but we've discussed before that it's not trivial to reduce it | 16:23 |
| adamw | if we could get tricksy we could have a dynamically generated 'not-yet-completed tests' version of the matrix? | 16:23 |
| adamw | which only shows the white boxes... | 16:23 |
| Oxf13 | if only we had a test case management system | 16:23 |
| jlaska | not something we want or need | 16:24 |
| jlaska | adamw: you can sort the matrix now to get that ... but certainly not as dynamic as you suggest | 16:24 |
| adamw | yes, if only we had a TCMS we could spend lots of time maintaining and debugging it instead of testing things! | 16:24 |
| jlaska | I keep thinking there's a <buzzword> crowd source </buzzword> solution here if we could gather feedback ... something smolt-like | 16:24 |
| jlaska | that's probably too out there and not anything short-term | 16:24 |
| Oxf13 | adamw: instead of spending time trying to figure out the right magical wiki incantation to get a box to change from white to yellow or red? | 16:25 |
| Southern_Gentlem | my test cases have come from testing re-spins which evolved over time | 16:25 |
| jlaska | Oxf13: sorry, been there done that. I'm really not convinced that a TCMS created and maintained by this small group is the way to improving quality in Fedora | 16:25 |
| Oxf13 | jlaska: yeah, when we have to invent and manage it ourselves you're right | 16:25 |
| Oxf13 | it's really a shame that RHT has such resources and aren't willing to share | 16:25 |
| adamw | jlaska: i didn't think of sorting the matrix, perhaps we could flag that up, and maybe include links to a sorted view in lili's emails? | 16:25 |
| jlaska | #info adam suggests creating links to a sorted list of "What's remaining for testing" in lili's emails | 16:26 |
| jlaska | Oxf13: there are off-the-shelf tools we could employ ... but again, I'm not real sold on the win. Frustrating for sure, but I think that's not where our valid add is | 16:27 |
| jlaska | okay, so there are some ideas here to build on for the next release | 16:27 |
| Oxf13 | jlaska: what are we going to do when we have autoQA actually running tests? Are we going to have to write some sort of wiki blaster to drop test results into the wiki? | 16:27 |
| jlaska | I'll be annoying folks constantly for more of them ... so if ideas come, feel free to send to the list | 16:27 |
| jlaska | Oxf13: actually running? they're running now | 16:28 |
| jlaska | Oxf13: different topic, we can talk about that shortly | 16:28 |
| jlaska | #info Possible improvement - integration between lili and Southern_Gentlem's test matrices | 16:28 |
| jlaska | #info Possible improvement - including a link to "Remaining testing" when sending emails | 16:28 |
| jlaska | anything else I missed? | 16:29 |
| wwoods | the automated results go Elsewhere, for the moment. The simplest thing would be to keep the automated and manual tests separate and have a "automated test results are here" link. | 16:29 |
| wwoods | having autoqa edit the wiki is technically possible and probably not that hard | 16:29 |
| Southern_Gentlem | jlaska, on testing i see it as we want alot of duplication to test on as much hardware as possible | 16:29 |
| jlaska | "Is _anaconda_ broken?" | 16:29 |
| Southern_Gentlem | better to have several people sign off on one test than one | 16:30 |
| jlaska | Southern_Gentlem: good point ... we benefit from breadth of hardware coverage here ... that's something to consider | 16:30 |
| jlaska | #info Southern_Gentlem suggests having multiple testers provides better hardware diversity in testing | 16:31 |
| jlaska | okay ... let's shift gears | 16:31 |
| Southern_Gentlem | the only thing broken i have found was the nfs installs | 16:31 |
| jlaska | Southern_Gentlem: yeah, I think kparal feels your pain there too :) | 16:31 |
| kparal | right | 16:31 |
| Southern_Gentlem | which i dont consider a blocker for beta | 16:31 |
| Oxf13 | wait, nfs installs broken? | 16:32 |
| Oxf13 | that'd be a neat trick since I seemed to have done a few around here during the freeze | 16:32 |
| * Oxf13 is confused | 16:32 | |
| kparal | https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=528537 | 16:32 |
| jlaska | Oxf13: no they're not broken ... but there are some issues around nfs installations | 16:32 |
| buggbot | Bug 528537: medium, low, ---, steved, ASSIGNED, fails to get kickstart file over nfs. | 16:32 |
| Oxf13 | ah, yeah, cobbler provides the nfs files over http | 16:32 |
| jlaska | ks=nfs: and nfsiso= both had some trouble | 16:32 |
| jlaska | lili_: anything else you wanted to share about the test matrix before we move on? | 16:33 |
| lili_ | i am thinking whether our test cases need to optimize | 16:34 |
| lili_ | you can move on, we can find some time to talk about this later | 16:35 |
| jlaska | lili_: okay ... I think you might be on to something ... but I don't have any great ideas at the moment :( | 16:36 |
| jlaska | if anyone has suggestions for optimizing the test runs ... please do contact lili_ | 16:36 |
| jlaska | #topic AutoQA Updates from wwoods and kparal | 16:36 |
| jlaska | wwoods and kparal, I've got you both on for some updates today | 16:37 |
| jlaska | who wants to go first? | 16:37 |
| kparal | let wwoods, he has some errand :) | 16:37 |
| wwoods | heh | 16:37 |
| kparal | if i remember it correctly | 16:37 |
| wwoods | indeed | 16:37 |
| jlaska | take us away calgo^W wwoods | 16:38 |
| wwoods | let's see - we're still working on getting the production autoqa instance active | 16:38 |
| wwoods | more news on that as it happens, naturally | 16:38 |
| wwoods | I've given up on patching autotest to add info about the job ID to the tests as they run | 16:39 |
| wwoods | far simpler just to write a small "how to find test results" document | 16:39 |
| wwoods | rather than maintaining an invasive and complicated patch | 16:39 |
| wwoods | so really all that's left to do for the israwhidebroken pilot is getting everything up in production | 16:40 |
| jlaska | #info Instead of patching autotest to include a link back to test results, plans to document "How to find test logs" in the works | 16:40 |
| jlaska | wwoods: okay, I just got an update on the hardware shipment ticket today with some confusion ... I'll see if I can get more info on that | 16:40 |
| wwoods | fair enough | 16:41 |
| wwoods | so the next thing in the works is setting up a hook/watcher for koji | 16:41 |
| jlaska | #info waiting on production hardware delivery | 16:41 |
| kparal | i have seen you already started to work on that | 16:41 |
| wwoods | yes - https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/browser/hooks/post-koji-build/watch-koji-builds.py | 16:41 |
| wwoods | it works basically like the other watchers, listing all new builds since the previous run | 16:42 |
| kparal | will you be able to also get link to the old package? | 16:42 |
| kparal | not just the new one? | 16:42 |
| wwoods | yes, I have some example code to do that | 16:42 |
| kparal | great | 16:42 |
| wwoods | but that's not really the watcher's problem | 16:42 |
| wwoods | (arguably) | 16:42 |
| wwoods | anyway, yes, it's easy to get a list of previous released versions of a new package | 16:42 |
| wwoods | we just need to figure out what data post-koji-build tests can expect/require | 16:43 |
| wwoods | and then we'll have a new hook ready to run tests | 16:43 |
| kparal | that's perfect, we can then try to hook up my script | 16:43 |
| wwoods | "url of new package(s)" seems obvious, not sure what else. possibly "tags for new package" | 16:43 |
| wwoods | if anyone has some test ideas and has a clear picture of what data the test would need to run | 16:43 |
| wwoods | please let me know | 16:44 |
| jlaska | #info Preliminary hook/watcher for koji package builds available - https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/browser/hooks/post-koji-build/watch-koji-builds.py | 16:44 |
| wwoods | note that all the current watcher does is print a list of builds | 16:44 |
| wwoods | it doesn't run autoqa yet | 16:44 |
| wwoods | need to define test requirements before we can complete the hook | 16:44 |
| * jlaska updates more info's | 16:44 | |
| wwoods | anyway I may just use package URL + tag | 16:44 |
| wwoods | for the first implementation | 16:44 |
| wwoods | and we'll move on from there. | 16:45 |
| wwoods | that's about all I've got | 16:45 |
| jlaska | #info Additional work needed on koji package watcher/hook - only prints list of builds, needs integration into autoqa | 16:45 |
| jlaska | wwoods: cool, nice work | 16:45 |
| Oxf13 | right as you design this think about the future with a message bus | 16:46 |
| wwoods | ah, yes | 16:46 |
| wwoods | the koji guys are working on a plugin system for the koji hub | 16:46 |
| Oxf13 | all you're going to get on the bus is "build of $foo was completed for target $bar" | 16:46 |
| wwoods | such that you can react to incoming events | 16:46 |
| jlaska | about your question ... this might be related to a different watcher ... but might lmacken be a good person to ask about what data the test would need to run? | 16:46 |
| Oxf13 | the test would probably have to figure out what the previous thing was to compare against | 16:46 |
| wwoods | and, say, send out a message on a bus saying "package $nvr tagged into $tag" | 16:46 |
| mbonnet | Oxf13: not necessarily. We're probably going to provide a dict of the build info: id, name, version, release, task ID, etc. | 16:47 |
| wwoods | Oxf13: yep - that's exactly why I'm saying that code should go into the tests themselves rather than the watcher | 16:47 |
| wwoods | it's the same code either way | 16:47 |
| Oxf13 | mbonnet: well sure, I meant that we wouldn't provide info like "previous build" | 16:47 |
| kparal | wwoods: only it can be duplicated in the tests | 16:47 |
| wwoods | given package name (or nvr) and tag, it's easy to look up the most recent nvr of that package for other related tags | 16:47 |
| wwoods | kparal: they can share a library | 16:47 |
| mbonnet | Oxf13: right, since koji doesn't really have a good idea of what that means | 16:47 |
| wwoods | as the rats_* tests do with rats.py | 16:47 |
| kparal | wwoods: that's true, ok | 16:48 |
| Oxf13 | and there will probably be 2 types of things autoqa would want to pick up on | 16:48 |
| Oxf13 | A) a build completing, and B) a build being tagged | 16:48 |
| wwoods | Oxf13: actually, no | 16:48 |
| Oxf13 | since in the grand future, a build won't be tagged until /after/ the autoqa passes | 16:48 |
| wwoods | it's simpler to just wait for the build to be tagged with -candidate or -raw or something | 16:48 |
| Oxf13 | erm | 16:48 |
| wwoods | and then run tests and move it to a different tag | 16:48 |
| Oxf13 | we don't want to tag builds that are no good | 16:48 |
| wwoods | we can tag them with other things | 16:49 |
| Oxf13 | hence wanting testing inserted before the tag action | 16:49 |
| wwoods | they can land in dist-funk-whatever-preqa | 16:49 |
| wwoods | and then run the tests | 16:49 |
| Oxf13 | ugh | 16:49 |
| Oxf13 | is there reasoning for this? | 16:49 |
| wwoods | mikem tells me that a) watching for untagged builds is problematic and b) tag operations are cheap | 16:49 |
| Oxf13 | ok. | 16:49 |
| * kparal will be back in 30s | 16:49 | |
| jlaska | kparal: okay, you're up next | 16:50 |
| jlaska | #info jkeating reminded to keep an eye towards future integration with the message bus | 16:50 |
| wwoods | the idea is the same either way, we're just quibbling over what the original trigger will be | 16:50 |
| wwoods | currently it's hard to trigger on untagged builds, later it might be easier | 16:50 |
| Oxf13 | sure | 16:50 |
| wwoods | doesn't really matter in the end, we can just pick whichever way we like | 16:50 |
| Oxf13 | tagging them with something just generates more mail, complicates garbage collection, and complicates our build scripts | 16:50 |
| jlaska | This seems like stuff we can iron out later, no? | 16:51 |
| Oxf13 | yes | 16:51 |
| jlaska | or do we need to setup a side-discussion? | 16:51 |
| * kparal is back | 16:51 | |
| jlaska | kparal: howabout on your end ... any autoqa updates? | 16:52 |
| kparal | ok, my turn. i have cheated a little and have prepared the text in the meantime. so don't wonder, i don't really type that fast :) | 16:52 |
| kparal | so, important change #1 - name: the script for displaying important differences between rpms, originally called 'packagediff', was renamed to 'rpmguard'. i believe it's a much better name, and i hope we finished renaming it :) | 16:52 |
| kparal | important change #2 - location: the autoqa project has provided hosting for the rpmguard, so you can find it in it's git, more exactly here: | 16:52 |
| kparal | http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/autoqa.git?a=tree;f=tests/rpmguard | 16:52 |
| jlaska | rpmguard at least makes for a better future icon! :) | 16:52 |
| jlaska | #info #1 - name: the script for displaying important differences between rpms, originally called 'packagediff', was renamed to 'rpmguard' | 16:53 |
| kparal | yes, rpmguard: http://cats-whisker.com/web/node/85 | 16:53 |
| kparal | In the last week I have made some improvements - for example it now handles also obsoletes/conflicts changes. Also a few bugs were fixed, most notably it now correctly compares versioned require/provide/etc tags. | 16:53 |
| jlaska | #info #2 - location: the autoqa project has provided hosting for the rpmguard (see http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/autoqa.git?a=tree;f=tests/rpmguard) | 16:53 |
| kparal | I have created a few simple rpms using rpmfluff and tested if the script works ok. So hopefully it should do what it is supposed to do. | 16:53 |
| kparal | I will be very glad if you download it, try it, provide a feedback on it. But please be sure also to use latest rpmdiff from svn (prerequisite for rpmguard), because there were some important bugs fixed recently. I will also write a blogpost and post a message to mailing lists in the next days. | 16:54 |
| kparal | Also if you have some suggestions how to restructure the output of rpmguard, to be better parseable/machine processable, let me know. Especially if wwoods have some requirements what to ouput so that autoqa can utilize it, I'm all ears. | 16:54 |
| kparal | And that's probably all the news from rpmguard's world. | 16:54 |
| jlaska | kparal: I'm excited to see you able to make use of rpmfluff | 16:55 |
| jlaska | sounds like a cool tool | 16:55 |
| kparal | i have even created a first ticket for that tool:) https://fedorahosted.org/rpmfluff/report/1 | 16:55 |
| jlaska | #help if interested, help test rpmguard (using latest rpmdiff from svn) | 16:55 |
| jlaska | nice work :) | 16:56 |
| jlaska | wwoods or kparal, any other items not captured, or follow-up items for next week? | 16:56 |
| kparal | nothing on my mind currently | 16:57 |
| jlaska | feel free to make liberal use of #info and #action | 16:57 |
| jlaska | okay gang, thanks for the progress updates | 16:57 |
| jlaska | Next up ... hopefully we've kept Viking-Ice around for a bit here | 16:57 |
| jlaska | #topic How_to_Debug_<component> Update from Viking-Ice | 16:57 |
| jlaska | Viking-Ice: got a few minutes to share progress / questions on your wiki initiative? | 16:57 |
| Viking-Ice | adamw: was looking into if it was doable to do this as a template | 16:58 |
| adamw | unfortunately i never got time to look at it last week. fortunately, i delegated... | 16:59 |
| adamw | <rjune> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Dracut_problems2 | 16:59 |
| adamw | https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Template:How_to_debug2 | 16:59 |
| adamw | It's a start, I'm assuming there's just too much in each variable | 16:59 |
| adamw | so rjune had a look, that's what he's come up with so far. i haven't checked it out myself yet. | 16:59 |
| Viking-Ice | I never got <notinclude><include> wiki shit to work + I think each of these pages need to be tailored to component.. | 16:59 |
| jlaska | #info rjune assisted adamw in testing the use of a wiki template | 16:59 |
| jlaska | #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Dracut_problems2 | 16:59 |
| jlaska | #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Template:How_to_debug2 | 16:59 |
| jlaska | That looks darned good to me | 17:00 |
| adamw | for the record, i think in theory we should be able to come up with a template which defines the general layout in a flexible enough way that we can still customize individual pages, but that's me being all mouth and no action =) | 17:00 |
| jlaska | that's what we've done with
DescriptionA brief description of the functionality being tested.
How to test
Expected Results
... I Don't see why we can't here |
17:00 |
| jlaska | that format leaves plenty of room for embrace + extend | 17:00 |
| adamw | so if me/rjune can't manage that in a reasonable time frame i'm not going to stand in the way of people revising pages 'statically' for sure. and we can always work on both, the static revises can always be turned into template use later. | 17:00 |
| Viking-Ice | fine if we can | 17:00 |
| Viking-Ice | I'm by no means wiki expert.. | 17:01 |
| adamw | so please don't let this stop you (anyone) working on revising pages to fit the new naming scheme / layout. | 17:01 |
| jlaska | adamw: how will you know when you and rjune are done? | 17:01 |
| adamw | jlaska: when we have something we're happy with we'll send it to the list, I think | 17:01 |
| adamw | and if we get a template that's generally agreed upon we'll document its use in the Debugging category page | 17:02 |
| jlaska | sounds like a plan | 17:02 |
| Viking-Ice | so we should just rewrite those pages again? ( using the template ) | 17:02 |
| Viking-Ice | instead of the current method of copy/paste the template | 17:02 |
| adamw | Viking-Ice: not right now, that template isn't finalized i don't think | 17:02 |
| Viking-Ice | ok | 17:02 |
| adamw | Viking-Ice: for now as I said we can still go ahead and revise pages using copy/paste, and then we can always adjust them to use the template later if everyone's happy with it | 17:02 |
| adamw | sound good? | 17:03 |
| Viking-Ice | yup ok | 17:03 |
| jlaska | Viking-Ice: any other items you'd like to record / discuss today? | 17:03 |
| Viking-Ice | nope nothing to share or discuss | 17:04 |
| adamw | does anyone want to take an action item to go ahead and do the renaming? | 17:04 |
| adamw | (if it's not been done already) | 17:04 |
| adamw | i think everyone agreed on the new naming scheme and there's nothing blocking us from just going ahead and renaming all pages to use it | 17:04 |
| jlaska | adamw: I can take that, that's just a ticket in to the wiki team no? | 17:04 |
| adamw | no need, you can do it directly | 17:04 |
| jlaska | sure, doesn't seem like a lot of pages | 17:04 |
| adamw | there's a 'move' button for every wiki page that lets you rename it | 17:04 |
| jlaska | yuppers | 17:05 |
| jlaska | anyone else want it? | 17:05 |
| adamw | but before you do that, make a list of all pages that link to the old name (there's a handy 'what links here' link on the left side that can tell you that) and update them all to point to the new name | 17:05 |
| adamw | there's an automatic redirect, of course, but it's best to update the links anyway - the automatic redirects break if you change name too many times, i believe | 17:05 |
| jlaska | #action jlaska to rename other debug pages (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Debugging) to be consistent with "How to debug <component> problems". Update back-links also | 17:06 |
| jlaska | adamw: Viking-Ice you want me to include pages we didn't produce in the move? | 17:07 |
| jlaska | e.g. Anaconda/BugReporting and "Reporting virt bugs" ? | 17:07 |
| jlaska | alrighty ... lt's move to open discussion | 17:08 |
| adamw | it may be nice to ask the people who created the pages first | 17:08 |
| jlaska | adamw: roger | 17:08 |
| adamw | but i'd envisage them being included in the end, if no-one complains | 17:08 |
| jlaska | #info existing Debugging pages using older name scheme will need to be moved | 17:08 |
| jlaska | #topic Open Discussion - <your topic here> | 17:09 |
| jlaska | okay folks ... any topics to raise that weren't discussed already? | 17:09 |
| Oxf13 | We're going to need extra eyes/fingers/whatever as we get crit-path tag requests for final | 17:09 |
| adamw | is there a list to subscribe to to be notified of 'em? a list for new trac reports for releng? | 17:10 |
| Oxf13 | there is the rel-eng@lists.fedorahosted.org list | 17:10 |
| Oxf13 | also , rss feeds | 17:10 |
| adamw | ah, rss sounds like win | 17:10 |
| jlaska | #info Oxf13 asked for extra eyes/fingers as crit-path tag requests come in for final | 17:10 |
| jlaska | Oxf13: is there a standard set of criteria that must be provided for a crit-path package update request? | 17:10 |
| jlaska | e.g. link to bugzilla, link to patches, and an severity/impact statement? | 17:11 |
| Oxf13 | there is no standard | 17:11 |
| jlaska | and must exist on F12Blocker ? | 17:11 |
| Oxf13 | we didn't set one for crit-path other than "somebody else will test it" | 17:11 |
| Viking-Ice | jlaska: if we move pages should we rewrite them at the same time for the new layout ? | 17:11 |
| Oxf13 | jlaska: it's really up to the reviewer what info they'll require at this point. We're still feeling our way around crit-path stuff | 17:11 |
| jlaska | Viking-Ice: I believe the edit and the move are different operations | 17:11 |
| adamw | Viking-Ice: yeah, you can do the rename without the rewrite. | 17:12 |
| adamw | and vice versa. | 17:12 |
| adamw | obviously doing both is the end goal, though. =) | 17:12 |
| Oxf13 | adamw: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/timeline?ticket=on&changeset=on&milestone=on&wiki=on&max=50&daysback=90&format=rss You could probably tweak that URL to get tickets only | 17:12 |
| jlaska | Oxf13: since we don't yet have the tooling or resources in place to fully qualify crit-path changes ... perhaps asking requestors to provide information to facilitate peer review? | 17:12 |
| adamw | Oxf13: thanks, i'll play with it. | 17:12 |
| Viking-Ice | Well yes but I was more thinking that we should rewrite them just delete the old one.. | 17:13 |
| Viking-Ice | after rewrite ofcourse | 17:13 |
| Oxf13 | jlaska: we already ask them to provide info such as what they are fixing, why, what testing they've done, and what happens if we don't include it | 17:13 |
| jlaska | Oxf13: oh okay, is there a template you ask requestors to follow? | 17:13 |
| adamw | #link https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/timeline?ticket=on&changeset=on&milestone=on&wiki=on&max=50&daysback=90&format=rss - rss feed to monitor tag requests | 17:13 |
| * jlaska not up on all the details of this process | 17:13 | |
| Oxf13 | jlaska: if they use 'make tag-request' yes | 17:13 |
| * jlaska thanks adamw for the meetbot tag | 17:14 | |
| adamw | Oxf13: btw, i hadn't heard of that until it was randomly mentioned in a list post...where's it documented? | 17:14 |
| Oxf13 | hadn't heard what? | 17:14 |
| Oxf13 | 'make tag-request' ? | 17:14 |
| adamw | yeah | 17:14 |
| Oxf13 | ah, so it just got created not too long ago, and was only available to rawhide users | 17:15 |
| Oxf13 | so I announced it in email hopeing to get some testing on it and do some tweaking | 17:15 |
| Oxf13 | I'm mostly happy with it though, so I wouldn't mind it finding its way into a wiki page | 17:15 |
| Oxf13 | but I've been... distracted | 17:15 |
| mcepl | Oxf13: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ReleaseEngineering/FinalFreezePolicy | 17:15 |
| Oxf13 | mcepl: feel free to add it there | 17:16 |
| mcepl | it is there | 17:16 |
| mcepl | I put it there | 17:16 |
| Oxf13 | ah it's at the bottom. | 17:16 |
| jlaska | Oxf13: do you have any update on the download.fedora.devel.redhat.com and download.fedoraproject.org rawhide syncing? | 17:16 |
| Oxf13 | that page could use some wiki/wordsmithing | 17:16 |
| Oxf13 | jlaska: no... is it still bad? | 17:16 |
| jlaska | Oxf13: I think ... it looks like our rats_install tests are still failing do to content out of sync | 17:16 |
| Oxf13 | *grump* | 17:16 |
| jlaska | #info rats_install tests operate against internal redhat.com mirror of rawhide ... and are failing due to what looks like out of sync content | 17:17 |
| jlaska | #link https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/autoqa-results/2009-October/001652.html | 17:17 |
| jlaska | okay folks ... anything else to discuss today | 17:17 |
| jlaska | or should we let lili_ sleep? :) | 17:17 |
| adamw | mcepl: excellent, thanks | 17:18 |
| adamw | jlaska: just one thing | 17:18 |
| jlaska | adamw: sure, go for it | 17:18 |
| adamw | jlaska and I have been working on the common bugs page | 17:18 |
| adamw | #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F12_bugs | 17:18 |
| adamw | we've more or less cleared the list of bugs already tagged to be included on it | 17:18 |
| lili_ | :) | 17:18 |
| adamw | if you're aware of any bug that's in the released beta images that you think should be documented there, please either add it (there's guidelines on layout in the wiki page source) or add the 'CommonBugs' keyword to the bug report, which should trigger me or jlaska or anyone else monitoring that keyword to add it | 17:19 |
| jlaska | adamw: you give me credit for common_bugs? I've had a minor contribution | 17:19 |
| adamw | oh hush with the modesty :) | 17:19 |
| jlaska | #action jlaska - help clean out remaining promised Common_F12_Bugs | 17:19 |
| adamw | basically if it's a bug more than a handful of people are likely to run into, and the workaround isn't incredibly obvious, it'd be good to have the issue listed on that page | 17:20 |
| jlaska | #link http://tinyurl.com/l4kma5 - Bugs needing Common_F12_Bugs documentation | 17:20 |
| jlaska | #info if you're aware of any bug that's in the released beta images that you think should be documented there, please either add it (there's guidelines on layout in the wiki page source) or add the 'CommonBugs' keyword to the bug report | 17:20 |
| jlaska | adamw: great reminder, thanks adamw | 17:20 |
| adamw | i'll remove Alpha issues that are fixed in the beta today, and probably add some of the generic graphics stuff from the f11 page into the f12 one as it may sadly still be needed in some cases | 17:21 |
| adamw | and just one other thing - if you're talking to anyone about how awesome f12 is going to be, reference https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/F12_Beta_Announcement for talking points. :) | 17:21 |
| jlaska | #info talking points for Fedora 12 Beta awesome-ness - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/F12_Beta_Announcement | 17:22 |
| jlaska | right on | 17:22 |
| jlaska | alright gang ... I think that does it for today | 17:22 |
| Southern_Gentlem | i have found f12 beta to be fairly solid as far as the install process is going | 17:22 |
| adamw | yeah, i think f12 beta is actually pretty awesome. i've signed off on final distribution releases that were worse. =) | 17:23 |
| jlaska | thanks everyone for your time and to lili_ for _not_ sleeping | 17:23 |
| adamw | night lili! | 17:23 |
| Southern_Gentlem | except for the nfs issues it looks good | 17:23 |
| jlaska | let's keep our vigilence going for the coming weeks ... still have an RC yet to land | 17:23 |
| jlaska | #stopmeeting | 17:23 |
| jlaska | #endmeeting | 17:23 |
| Southern_Gentlem | jlaska, when you have isos to test ping me and if i have a little more advanced notice i will pull my test-team into testing | 17:24 |
| lili_ | have a nice day,bye | 17:25 |
| jlaska | Southern_Gentlem: thank you! Right now, lili uses rel-eng hosted tickets to track updates | 17:25 |
| jlaska | nirik: did meetbot eat the minutes? | 17:33 |
| nirik | jlaska: hum. ;( not sure what happened. | 17:46 |
| nirik | jlaska: appears so. ;( Sorry about that... ;( | 17:50 |
| nirik | jlaska: might be able to replay it in at some point. | 17:50 |
| jlaska | nirik: oh, a replay would be helpful | 17:53 |
| zodbot | Oxf13: Error: Can't start another meeting, one is in progress. | 18:05 |
| Oxf13 | um. | 18:05 |
| Oxf13 | #endmeeting | 18:05 |
| Oxf13 | jlaska: can you do #endmeeting ? | 18:05 |
| Oxf13 | nirik: the bot may be stuck | 18:05 |
| nirik | oh, hang on. | 18:06 |
| nirik | .addchair nirik | 18:06 |
| zodbot | nirik: (addchair <channel> <network> <nick>) -- Add a nick as a chair to the meeting. | 18:06 |
| nirik | .addchair #fedora-meeting nirik | 18:06 |
| zodbot | nirik: (addchair <channel> <network> <nick>) -- Add a nick as a chair to the meeting. | 18:06 |
| jlaska | #endmeeting | 18:07 |
| jlaska | should I start meeting again? | 18:07 |
| jlaska | #stopmeeting | 18:07 |
| zodbot | jlaska: Error: Can't start another meeting, one is in progress. | 18:07 |
| nirik | no, hang on. | 18:07 |
| Oxf13 | who's the chair? | 18:07 |
| jlaska | #endmeeting | 18:07 |
| jlaska | should be me | 18:07 |
| nirik | hum. | 18:08 |
| nirik | frack. Xchat. ;( | 18:08 |
| jlaska | #chair nirik | 18:09 |
| zodbot | Current chairs: jlaska nirik | 18:09 |
| notting | Oxf13: anything for today? | 18:09 |
| nirik | #endmeeting | 18:09 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!