From Fedora Project Wiki
Attendees
People present (lines said):
- jlaska (151)
- adamw (56)
- kparal (28)
- j_dulaney (21)
- brunowolff (16)
- tflink (14)
- vhumpa (12)
- pbrobinson (9)
- jsmith (5)
- Southern_Gentlem (4)
- rbergeron (3)
- satellit_ (3)
- fenrus02 (1)
- elad661 (1)
- Viking-Ice (1)
- msavy (1)
Unable to attend:
Agenda
Previous meeting follow-up
- tflink to follow-up with cloud sig for test day recap
- mgoldmann or msavy will follow-up this week (conferences previous 2 weeks)
- jlaska to follow-up w/ halfline on bug#702650, kparal+jlaska to verify
- Appears to be tested and resolved, thanks kparal and halfline
- adamw proposing patch for bug#697834
- Done ... AcceptedNTH and available for walters if desired
- jlaska - file proposed NTH bugs for F14->F15
- Done
F-15-Final-RC3 status
- STATUS: INPROGRESS - Tuesday, May 17
- Continue to monitor for blocker bugs at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Current_Release_Blockers
- Thank you Robatino for the RC3 announcement and wiki management
- Robatino already created Final RC1 QA wiki pages at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Fedora_15_Final_RC_Test_Results
- The team conducted a *mini* review of 4 proposed blocker bugs ...
- RHBZ #704726 -
gnome-desktop3
- upgrade from F-14 broken due to conflicts with gnome-desktop- AGREED: tentatively agree to keep on list awaiting additional feedback from reporter. If conditions hold, likely not a blocker since yum upgrades are not the official upgrade mechanism
- RHBZ #704727 -
gnome-themes-standard
- upgrade from F-14 broken due to conflicts with gnome-themes- AGREED: tentatively agree to keep on list awaiting additional feedback from reporter. If conditions hold, likely not a blocker since yum upgrades are not the official upgrade mechanism
- RHBZ #704729 -
gobject-introspection
- upgrade from F-14 broken due to conflicts with dbus-glib- AGREED: tentatively agree to keep on list awaiting additional feedback from reporter. If conditions hold, likely not a blocker since yum upgrades are not the official upgrade mechanism
- RHBZ #704728 -
polkit
- upgrade from F-14 broken due to conflicts with polkit-desktop-policy- AGREED: tentatively agree to keep on list awaiting additional feedback from reporter. If conditions hold, likely not a blocker since yum upgrades are not the official upgrade mechanism
- RHBZ #704726 -
- And 3 proposed NTH bugs ...
- RHBZ #704188 -
anaconda
- TypeError: 'NoneType' object is not subscriptable- AGREED: AcceptedNTH
- RHBZ #704020 -
gnome-panel
- libpanel_applet changed ABI; not all applets ported- AGREED: RejectedNTH - Yum upgrades not officially supported, day-0 update acceptable.
- RHBZ #703944 -
pfstools
- pfstools-octave has broken dependencies.- AGREED: RejectedNTH - Yum upgrades not officially supported, day-0 update acceptable.
- RHBZ #704188 -
AutoQA update
- kparal implemented package caching in AutoQA (optional, default off). When enabled, it drastically speeds up mainly depcheck runs.
- jskladan introduced an algorithm to filter interesting information from depcheck log about why a particular package has broken dependencies
- we started to nicely document our test cases. First piece is upgradepath (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/AutoQA_tests/Upgradepath)
- tflink worked on issue of yum getting stuck in a loop that generated huge depcheck logs. When new yum builds land in stable repos, we should be have that handled. Tflink also noted the updates are still in 'updates-testing', pending additional positive karma.
- vhumpa created a pretty text template for our future test reports (see http://vhumpa.fedorapeople.org/prettylog_upgradepath_example2.txt)
- Jlaska reported that the log size issue appears under control. Compressing logs > 100M every 2 hours
Upcoming QA events
- Tuesday, May 17 - Go/NoGo meeting
- Tuesday, May 24 - Final (GA) release
Open Discussion - <your topic here>
Action items
IRC Log
jlaska | #startmeeting Fedora QA Meeting | 15:00 |
---|---|---|
zodbot | Meeting started Mon May 16 15:00:18 2011 UTC. The chair is jlaska. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 15:00 |
zodbot | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. | 15:00 |
adamw | yo | 15:00 |
jlaska | #meetingname fedora-qa | 15:00 |
zodbot | The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa' | 15:00 |
brunowolff | I talked to Dennis and he is going to do the Games spin today. | 15:00 |
jlaska | #topic Roll Call | 15:00 |
jlaska | brunowolff: ah, thanks for doing that | 15:00 |
* tflink is present | 15:00 | |
* fenrus02 hands out bacon | 15:00 | |
jlaska | adamw: tflink: howdy | 15:00 |
* elad661 is here | 15:00 | |
jlaska | fenrus02: always a crowd pleaser :) | 15:00 |
* Viking-Ice here | 15:00 | |
* vhumpa is here | 15:01 | |
jlaska | hi elad661, Viking-Ice, vhumpa | 15:01 |
* kparal waves | 15:01 | |
* brunowolff is here | 15:01 | |
jlaska | heyo kparal and brunowolff | 15:01 |
* rbergeron waves. | 15:01 | |
brunowolff | SOAS is waiting for an OK, as I guess it has some issues. | 15:01 |
* jlaska uses two hands to wave to rbergeron | 15:01 | |
rbergeron | brunowolff: excellent :) | 15:01 |
* satellit_ lurking | 15:01 | |
jlaska | I don't see robatino lurking ... maybe he'll join later | 15:02 |
jlaska | same for jskladan | 15:02 |
jlaska | alright, let's get started | 15:02 |
jlaska | #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20110516 | 15:02 |
jlaska | #topic Previous meeting follow-up | 15:02 |
jlaska | #info tflink to follow-up with cloud sig for test day recap | 15:03 |
jlaska | looks like mgoldmann or msavy will follow-up this week (conferences previous 2 weeks) | 15:03 |
jlaska | so this'll probably be sent out shortly | 15:03 |
tflink | yeah, I think that you captured it (to my understanding) | 15:03 |
msavy | i'm typing up the test-day post mortem right now :D | 15:03 |
jlaska | msavy: sweet! thank you :) | 15:04 |
adamw | thanks! | 15:04 |
jlaska | a few bug follow-ups that were taken care of ... | 15:04 |
jlaska | #info jlaska to follow-up w/ halfline on bug#702650, kparal+jlaska to verify -- Appears to be tested and resolved, thanks kparal and halfline! | 15:04 |
jlaska | #info adamw proposing patch for bug#697834 -- Done ... AcceptedNTH and available for walters if desired | 15:04 |
jlaska | #info jlaska - file proposed NTH bugs for F14->F15 -- Done ... with help from adamw, those affecting the media were AcceptedNTH | 15:05 |
jlaska | that's all I had from last week ... anything I missed | 15:05 |
jlaska | or anything you want to make noise about? | 15:05 |
jlaska | if not ... we'll move on ... | 15:05 |
* jsmith has nothing | 15:05 | |
jlaska | #topic F-15-Final-RC3 status | 15:06 |
jlaska | #info Just a reminder - the Go/No_Go meeting is scheduled for tomorrow (Tuesday, May 17) | 15:06 |
jlaska | #link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Go_No_Go_Meeting | 15:06 |
jlaska | That is where QA provides an update on testing and provides an assessment for how well the release criteria are holding up | 15:07 |
brunowolff | Time? | 15:07 |
jlaska | then we go around the room and shake hands, hi-fives etc... | 15:07 |
adamw | autographs come later | 15:07 |
jlaska | yup | 15:07 |
jlaska | brunowolff: the schedule lists it at 17:00 EDT | 15:07 |
jlaska | rbergeron: will you be sending out that meeting notice, or do you want someone else to grab it? | 15:07 |
jlaska | in the meantime, we'll continue to monitor for blocker bugs at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Current_Release_Blockers | 15:08 |
jlaska | #info Thank you robatino for the RC3 announcement and wiki management | 15:08 |
vhumpa | Things look good on the desktop front. I run into few bugs while doing the desktop testing, but nothing close to being a stopper. | 15:09 |
jlaska | vhumpa: thanks for running through those desktop tests | 15:09 |
jlaska | #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Installation_Test | 15:09 |
adamw | vhumpa: you said you've done some of the 'desktop' (gnome) tests too, are you going to add them to the matrix soon? | 15:09 |
jlaska | #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test | 15:09 |
vhumpa | adamw: I put them there about 15 minutes ago :) | 15:10 |
* jlaska has to run a few odd-ball hardware tests on the install matrix | 15:10 | |
jlaska | otherwise, it's looking in good shape | 15:10 |
adamw | vhumpa: oh huh, i didn't see it | 15:11 |
adamw | oh there we go! thanks | 15:11 |
jlaska | anything else folks want to cover before we dive into a mini-proposed bug review? | 15:11 |
jlaska | #info The QA retrospective page available for noting the good/bad/ugly ... https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_15_QA_Retrospective | 15:11 |
jlaska | that page is a helpful tool for those with short memories (me) :) | 15:12 |
vhumpa | adamw: I will still try to complete the notification test case later | 15:12 |
jlaska | okay, we have 4 proposed blockers, and 3 proposed NTH ... who wants to review some bugs? | 15:12 |
jlaska | #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Current_Release_Blockers | 15:13 |
adamw | small cheer | 15:13 |
* jlaska notes ... silence indicates a +1 | 15:13 | |
jlaska | :) | 15:13 |
jlaska | this _should_ be quick | 15:13 |
* jsmith is happy to help | 15:13 | |
adamw | the good news is that we can pretty much take the four proposed blockers together | 15:13 |
jlaska | if not ... we'll punt for #fedora-qa | 15:14 |
jsmith | adamw: Yeah... | 15:14 |
jlaska | adamw: yeah, good! | 15:14 |
jlaska | #topic https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=704726 | 15:14 |
jlaska | #info upgrade from F-14 broken due to conflicts with gnome-desktop | 15:14 |
jlaska | adamw: you've already reviewed these issues it seems, any thoughts? | 15:14 |
adamw | they're odd issues | 15:14 |
adamw | i really can't see why it's going wrong, but since the report's from peter who I know has his head screws on, it worries me just a bit | 15:15 |
jlaska | is Peter around? | 15:15 |
adamw | yeah, i just pinged to see if he'd pop in | 15:15 |
jlaska | do we know if these are found with 'yum' upgrades, not anaconda/preupgrade? | 15:15 |
Southern_Gentlem | ? | 15:15 |
adamw | this was a yum upgrade, but i'd like to find out what actually happened as it's an odd issue | 15:15 |
Southern_Gentlem | is this with rc3? | 15:15 |
Southern_Gentlem | if so i will retest | 15:16 |
jlaska | Southern_Gentlem: I don't think so ... it appears to be against the online reops | 15:16 |
jlaska | repos | 15:16 |
adamw | Southern_Gentlem: if you're doing a yum upgrade the concept doesn't exactly apply | 15:16 |
jlaska | which may not yet be in sync with RC3 | 15:16 |
adamw | (concept of 'RC3', that is) | 15:16 |
adamw | so what's happening here is that he has yum complaining about conflicts between an f15 package and a package which looks to be from the f14 install | 15:16 |
adamw | but there are clearly higher versioned f15 packages available in the f15 repos | 15:17 |
vhumpa | Saying by the gnome-desktop3 version, it looks like "RC3" | 15:17 |
adamw | so i don't know why the f14 package is in play at all | 15:17 |
adamw | it's kind of hard to tell, i guess it would be nice to have a much fuller log | 15:17 |
jlaska | How do these style of upgrades fit with the release criteria? | 15:17 |
adamw | if peter doesn't show up we can ask him for the yum history report | 15:17 |
jsmith | Yeah, I'm thoroughly confused :-( | 15:17 |
adamw | jlaska: a yum upgrade doesn't, but like i say, before we kick this out i'd like to understand it | 15:17 |
Southern_Gentlem | i will test f14 everything install (except virtualization) fully updated to f15 rc3 | 15:17 |
jlaska | adamw: of course | 15:18 |
adamw | but even if it were valid as written, indeed, we wouldn't consider it a blocker | 15:18 |
adamw | Southern_Gentlem: thanks | 15:18 |
jlaska | adamw: because it's something we can "easily" fix with a day-0 post-release update? | 15:18 |
vhumpa | Could be a nth but not a blocker, based on its yum upgrade... | 15:18 |
adamw | jlaska: yeah, and we just don't support yum upgrades | 15:19 |
jlaska | proposed #agreed 704726 - tentatively agree to keep on list awaiting additional feedback from reporter. If conditions hold, likely not a blocker since yum upgrades are not the official upgrade mechanism | 15:19 |
adamw | we have shipped with issues like this in the past - things anaconda bashes its way around but yum chokes on - and all we've done is simply document them in the 'upgrading with yum' wiki page | 15:19 |
adamw | ack | 15:19 |
tflink | ack | 15:19 |
jlaska | ack from me ... will stay tuned for feedback from peter | 15:19 |
jlaska | anyone else ? ack/nak/patch? | 15:20 |
brunowolff | +1 | 15:20 |
vhumpa | +1 | 15:20 |
jlaska | okay, I think that should be enough | 15:20 |
jlaska | #agreed 704726 - tentatively agree to keep on list awaiting additional feedback from reporter. If conditions hold, likely not a blocker since yum upgrades are not the official upgrade mechanism | 15:20 |
jlaska | The 3 remaining bugs appear to be the same ... any objections if we follow that plan for all 4 yum upgrade bugs? | 15:21 |
adamw | that's what i was going to suggest | 15:21 |
brunowolff | Sounds like a good plan to me. | 15:21 |
tflink | no objections here | 15:21 |
jlaska | okay, bare with me for a moment while I fiddle with #agreed | 15:21 |
adamw | btw, in case it wasn't clear, this is doubly odd because peter seems to be the only one seeingi t | 15:21 |
jlaska | #agreed 704727 - tentatively agree to keep on list awaiting additional feedback from reporter. If conditions hold, likely not a blocker since yum upgrades are not the official upgrade mechanism | 15:21 |
adamw | i've done a yum upgrade and didn't see this, and i think others have too | 15:21 |
jlaska | #agreed 704728 - tentatively agree to keep on list awaiting additional feedback from reporter. If conditions hold, likely not a blocker since yum upgrades are not the official upgrade mechanism | 15:21 |
jlaska | #agreed 704729 - tentatively agree to keep on list awaiting additional feedback from reporter. If conditions hold, likely not a blocker since yum upgrades are not the official upgrade mechanism | 15:21 |
jlaska | yay for sequential bug #'s | 15:21 |
jlaska | adamw: wonder if it makes a differnce if your F14 system is updated before doing the F15 upgrade? | 15:22 |
tflink | wasn't there a time where updates weren't being pushed to updates-testing? I remember hitting that missing js build issue on friday | 15:22 |
brunowolff | I saw something similar when I did some yum upgrades a while back. I think some old applets were pinning old packages so that the transaction ended up with both new and old stuff. | 15:22 |
tflink | or am I remembering wrong? | 15:22 |
adamw | jlaska: possibly, and it could be to do with the repos selected too, but still | 15:23 |
adamw | my f14 system that i upgraded was fully updated | 15:23 |
jlaska | yup, let's stay tuned | 15:23 |
jlaska | tflink: I don't know :( | 15:23 |
j_dulaney | sorry I'm late | 15:23 |
jlaska | j_dulaney: hello | 15:23 |
j_dulaney | Just got off work | 15:23 |
adamw | pbrobinson: heh, just out of time :D | 15:23 |
jlaska | speak of the devil ... welcome pbrobinson! | 15:23 |
* pbrobinson waves | 15:23 | |
adamw | pbrobinson: we just decided to ask you for more information on those yum upgrade bugs, with the unspoken assumption you've been at the crack pipe again | 15:23 |
* j_dulaney wonders what the topic is | 15:24 | |
* j_dulaney now knows | 15:24 | |
pbrobinson | adamw: you know me too well ;-) | 15:24 |
jlaska | j_dulaney: reviewing proposed blockers | 15:24 |
brunowolff | Note that gnome-desktop3 and gnome desktop are different and I think this makes it possible for gnome-desktop to be kept if something requires it even though its obsoleted. | 15:24 |
adamw | pbrobinson: could you attach the full yum output to one of the bugs? you should be able to get it from yum history... | 15:24 |
adamw | brunowolff: there's an updated gnome-desktop in f15 repos, as well as gnome-desktop3 . | 15:24 |
pbrobinson | adamw: yes. I think I have at least one of them logged | 15:25 |
j_dulaney | adamw: btw, that bug we discussed is indeed fixed for me | 15:25 |
jlaska | pbrobinson: that's really all we decided so far ... anything else you wanted to raise for those bugs? | 15:26 |
adamw | brunowolff: the error message talks about gnome-desktop-2.32.0-2.fc14.i686 , but f15 has 2.32.0-7.fc15 | 15:26 |
jlaska | odd | 15:26 |
j_dulaney | indeed | 15:26 |
pbrobinson | I thought I had some logs with me, it appears it was something else. Will need to grab them when I get home in a couple of hours | 15:26 |
jlaska | pbrobinson: excellent, thank you. We'll stay tuned to the bugs | 15:27 |
jlaska | if nothing else ... let's knock these NTH bugs off the list ... | 15:27 |
adamw | thanks peter | 15:27 |
jlaska | pbrobinson: always nice to have a special guest visitor :) | 15:27 |
jlaska | #topic https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=704188 | 15:27 |
jlaska | #info TypeError: 'NoneType' object is not subscriptable | 15:28 |
pbrobinson | btw while I have everyone here, I spoke with dgilmore about cutting the SoaS release just after day 0 in the hope we can get a NM patch that makes wifi vaguely work. He said he had no issues with it but I now have to try and chase Dan to review my failing python patch | 15:28 |
jlaska | By definition, I think this constitutes a NTH bug ... but I'm not expecting any anaconda updates (or RC4) at this time, so it's unlikely this will be fixed in F15 (easy to document workaround) | 15:28 |
pbrobinson | jlaska: I would like to visit more often but work just seems to constantly blow chunks in terms of time spare at the moment! | 15:28 |
adamw | pbrobinson: cool | 15:28 |
j_dulaney | pbrobinson: what's up with Python? | 15:29 |
adamw | jlaska: areed | 15:29 |
jlaska | pbrobinson: no worries ... thanks for the heads up on staggering the SoaS release | 15:29 |
jlaska | proposed #agreed 704188 - AcceptedNTH - if anaconda is respun for F15, this fix will be included | 15:29 |
jlaska | ack/nak/patch? | 15:29 |
jlaska | adamw already ack'd | 15:29 |
vhumpa | +1 | 15:30 |
tflink | ack | 15:30 |
j_dulaney | +1 | 15:30 |
pbrobinson | j_dulaney: not a problem with python. Its a problem with the coder as I don't know python (its been on my todo list to learn). I'm attempting to convert the Sugar NetworkManager code to the 0.9 API and I'm failing! Any help would be appreciated | 15:30 |
brunowolff | +1 | 15:30 |
jlaska | #agreed 704188 - AcceptedNTH - if anaconda is respun for F15, this fix will be included | 15:30 |
jlaska | #topic https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=704020 | 15:30 |
jlaska | #info libpanel_applet changed ABI; not all applets ported | 15:30 |
jlaska | already in VERIFIED, and I wonder if this is already in RC3 | 15:31 |
* jlaska checks | 15:31 | |
adamw | jlaska and i are both -1 nth on this after thinking about it a bit | 15:31 |
jlaska | oh right, catching up on my comment here :) | 15:31 |
jlaska | adamw: the thinking is that this is a perfectly suitable day-0 update, and isn't required on media? | 15:32 |
adamw | yeah | 15:32 |
jlaska | right on | 15:32 |
j_dulaney | Does it block upgrades from F14? | 15:32 |
jlaska | proposed #agreed 704020 - RejectedNTH - Suitable as a day-0 update to 'updates' repo, does not inhibit anaconda-based upgrades | 15:32 |
j_dulaney | Ok | 15:33 |
j_dulaney | +1 for that | 15:33 |
tflink | ack | 15:33 |
brunowolff | +1 | 15:33 |
jlaska | #agreed 704020 - RejectedNTH - Suitable as a day-0 update to 'updates' repo, does not inhibit anaconda-based upgrades | 15:33 |
jlaska | last one ... | 15:33 |
jlaska | #topic https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703944 | 15:33 |
jlaska | #info pfstools-octave has broken dependencies. | 15:33 |
jlaska | comment#3 has the goods | 15:34 |
adamw | -1 | 15:34 |
tflink | -1 NTH | 15:34 |
jlaska | A good bug report, thanks to Orion for filing ... but this seems like the previous ... a perfectly good day-0 update that doesn't require media | 15:34 |
* jlaska works up the #agreed line | 15:34 | |
adamw | i think dep issues are pretty simple: if they're on the media they should be blocker, if they're not on the media they shouldn't be anything | 15:34 |
brunowolff | -1 NTH | 15:34 |
jsmith | -1 NTH | 15:34 |
j_dulaney | -1 nth | 15:34 |
jlaska | #agreed 703944 - RejectedNTH - Suitable as a day-0 update to 'updates' repo, does not inhibit anaconda-based upgrades and isn't referenced in comps | 15:35 |
jlaska | okay thanks all for the mini-review | 15:35 |
jlaska | we're in good shape so far | 15:35 |
* jlaska knocks wood | 15:35 | |
jlaska | andw we'll continue to monitor pbrobinson's issues ... and send out drones should things look bad | 15:35 |
j_dulaney | Mmm, drones | 15:35 |
adamw | we need to finish off the desktop tests too | 15:35 |
j_dulaney | The Borg kind, or the SGU kind? | 15:35 |
adamw | if anyone wants to help out with the remaining 'desktop' and 'fallback' tests that'd be great | 15:35 |
j_dulaney | I'll get fallback | 15:36 |
jlaska | #info Desktop validation testing still needed - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test | 15:36 |
jlaska | j_dulaney: thank you | 15:36 |
adamw | also, for both install and desktop tests, multiple results are good! even if someone else did it already, you can add your results | 15:36 |
jlaska | +1 to that | 15:36 |
j_dulaney | Indeed | 15:36 |
adamw | two 'passes' makes us more confident than one, and one 'pass' plus one 'fail' equals an issue we wouldn't have caught otherwise :) | 15:36 |
vhumpa | adamw: I will finish the remaining KDE and Desktop - thanks dualney! | 15:36 |
brunowolff | There are some obsoleted packages still in the F15 repo. It would be nice to get those cleared out before the repo is fixed. | 15:36 |
vhumpa | +1 too! | 15:37 |
jlaska | adamw: btw, I'll update the bz's post-meeting (unless you already did it) | 15:37 |
adamw | brunowolff: ah yeah, didn't you mail the list about that? | 15:37 |
adamw | jlaska: i didn't, thanks | 15:37 |
brunowolff | Yeah, but I didn't get a response from someone who could fix it. | 15:37 |
jlaska | dgilmore: ^^^ heads up | 15:37 |
brunowolff | I also wasn't sure how to find all such packages. | 15:37 |
adamw | brunowolff: we'll try and get dgilmore on it....yeah | 15:37 |
adamw | though i think you're actually supposed to go through the whole package retirement process to get rid of such packages | 15:38 |
jlaska | #info Some obsolete packages are included in F15 repo ... brunowolff suggested removing them before release | 15:38 |
adamw | obsoleted packages hanging around hence tends to happen, i remember i ran into such a one a few weeks back from a much older release | 15:38 |
jlaska | If nothing else, we'll move on to AutoQA ... | 15:38 |
jlaska | #topic AutoQA update | 15:39 |
* kparal 's topic! | 15:39 | |
brunowolff | I think the proper process is that the packagers involved are supposed to ask releng to block the packages from the appropriate repos. | 15:39 |
jlaska | kparal what's the latest in the world of AutoQA? | 15:39 |
* kparal takes the mic | 15:39 | |
kparal | Nothing really big this week. The whole week was spent on implementing tickets for 0.5.0 milestone. | 15:39 |
kparal | EOF | 15:39 |
brunowolff | But once that gets skipped, then I think the issue tends to get lost. | 15:39 |
kparal | ok, just kidding | 15:39 |
adamw | brunowolff: yeah, that's part of the retirement process, you have to do some other stuff first too. | 15:39 |
jlaska | kparal: hah | 15:40 |
kparal | I have a few info's in here | 15:40 |
kparal | #info kparal implemented package caching in AutoQA (optional, default off). When enabled, it drastically speeds up mainly depcheck runs. | 15:40 |
kparal | well, subsequent runs | 15:40 |
kparal | not the first one :) | 15:40 |
kparal | #info jskladan introduced an algorithm to filter interesting information from depcheck log about why a particular package has broken dependencies | 15:40 |
jlaska | Cool, so this is mostly for folks testing depcheck ... not something we'll use in production? | 15:40 |
kparal | jlaska: I'd use it for developers for now | 15:41 |
jlaska | gotcha | 15:41 |
kparal | on productions we would have to solve issues like /tmp cleaning, etc | 15:41 |
kparal | e.g. you must not clean in when test it running | 15:41 |
kparal | *it | 15:41 |
jlaska | there goes your cache! :) | 15:41 |
j_dulaney | That would be interesting | 15:41 |
tflink | bah, who needs the actual packages during a test :-D | 15:42 |
jlaska | tflink: yup, details! :) | 15:42 |
kparal | ok, as for jskladan's algorithm, it should be in autoqa-devel now, but I still didn't have time to check it out | 15:42 |
kparal | #info we started to nicely document our test cases. First piece is upgradepath. | 15:43 |
kparal | #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/AutoQA_tests/Upgradepath | 15:43 |
kparal | I always wonder whether I'm not repeating something said in the last meeting. I hope not :) | 15:43 |
kparal | #info tflink worked on issue of yum getting stuck in a loop that generated huge depcheck logs. When new yum builds land in stable repos, we should be have that handled. | 15:43 |
j_dulaney | Just out of curiosity, would I be better off trying to reconstruct my resultsDB work, or would it be more constructive for me to do something else? | 15:43 |
jlaska | love the "Fixing the failures" section ... that seems to cover sgallagh's request for providing tips for resolving | 15:43 |
kparal | j_dulaney: let's talk at fedora-qa after the meeting | 15:44 |
j_dulaney | Right | 15:44 |
kparal | #info vhumpa created a pretty text template for our future test reports | 15:44 |
kparal | #link http://vhumpa.fedorapeople.org/prettylog_upgradepath_example2.txt | 15:44 |
adamw | go vita | 15:44 |
kparal | and that's all from my list | 15:44 |
jlaska | *much* nicer output! | 15:44 |
kparal | I may have forgotten about someone, speak up please | 15:45 |
vhumpa | I am finishing class that will construct this for all the tests | 15:45 |
jlaska | Quick update on the gi-normous test logs in production ... our compression script (thank you vita) seems to be working well and keeping things under control. It runs every 2 hours and compresses logs > 100M. With current disk space, test results will be kept for 15 days | 15:46 |
jlaska | one of our test clients is out of action at the moment (qa06) ... I'm investigating why | 15:46 |
kparal | that's acceptable. but in the long run, I'd like to aim higher :) | 15:47 |
jlaska | kparal: sure | 15:47 |
vhumpa | Yay for now :-) ! | 15:47 |
tflink | it looks like the F15 yum update is pending push to stable and F14 is missing 1 karma | 15:47 |
jlaska | tflink: well, I could certainly deploy the f14 version and supply karma based on that :) | 15:47 |
tflink | the biggest offender in generating obscenely huge logs should be taken care of | 15:47 |
jlaska | it would be in keeping with our mascot | 15:47 |
kparal | :)) | 15:48 |
tflink | jlaska: the code change is pretty simple, a couple of lines I think | 15:48 |
jlaska | anything else we need to cover on the AutoQA front? | 15:49 |
kparal | all from me | 15:49 |
tflink | nothing I can think of | 15:49 |
jlaska | okay, thanks gang. Moving on ... | 15:49 |
jlaska | #topic Upcoming QA events | 15:49 |
jlaska | I think everyone knows this already, but for consistency sake ... | 15:50 |
jlaska | #link http://rbergero.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-15/f-15-quality-tasks.html | 15:50 |
jlaska | #info Tuesday, May 17 - Go/NoGo meeting - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Go_No_Go_Meeting | 15:50 |
jlaska | This is tomorrow, it will be fun, and we all hope it's good news | 15:50 |
jlaska | #info Tuesday, May 24 - Final (GA) release | 15:50 |
jlaska | that's all I've got listed | 15:50 |
jlaska | #info Open Discussion - <your topic here> | 15:51 |
jlaska | anything not previously discussed that needs mentioned here? | 15:51 |
rbergeron | :) | 15:51 |
satellit_ | soas will get a little more time for bug fixes? | 15:52 |
jlaska | I'm still catching up on the mailing list ... a lot of feedback over the weekend | 15:52 |
j_dulaney | I move we wrap things up | 15:52 |
adamw | satellit_: probably, pbrobinson said he'd talked to dgilmore about that | 15:52 |
satellit_ | ok | 15:52 |
jlaska | #info pbrobinson talking to dgilmore about shifting the SoaS release date to include some day-0 fixes | 15:53 |
jlaska | Okay, I'm setting the fuse for 1 minute ... | 15:53 |
jlaska | last call for topics ... | 15:53 |
pbrobinson | adamw satellit_: yes, I spoke about cutting the release after zero day updates hit to enable us to try and get a NM 0.9 patch in to at least give us working WiFi. | 15:53 |
adamw | i think it may be better to do it by pushing sugar-only patches into the f15 repo late, but we can figure that out later | 15:54 |
* jlaska holds on #endmeeting | 15:54 | |
jlaska | alright ... I think we're done here. Let's continue discussion on the list or #fedora-qa | 15:54 |
pbrobinson | adamw: that could work as well | 15:54 |
adamw | yup | 15:54 |
j_dulaney | pbrobinson: Whatup with Wifi? | 15:55 |
jlaska | Happy testing all, let's stay on top of our bugs and keep pushing for a successful release! | 15:55 |
jlaska | #endmeeting | 15:55 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!