From Fedora Project Wiki

< FWN‎ | Beats

(fwn 183 draft)
(create draft for fwn 185)
Line 12: Line 12:
There was no Test Day last week.
There was no Test Day last week.


No Test Day is scheduled on the main track next week. However, the new Fit and Finish<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fit_and_Finish</ref> Test Day track will be holding its first event<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2009-07-07_Fit_and_Finish:Display_Configuration</ref>, on display configuration (particularly multiple displays, and projectors). The Test Day page already includes several test scenarios, and a live CD for testing will soon be available. The Fit and Finish project is a great effort to improve the details of the Fedora project, so please show up to support their first event! The Test Day will be held on 2009-07-07 (Tuesday) in IRC #fedora-fitandfinish (note this is not the same channel where main track Test Days take place).
No Test Day is scheduled on the main track next week. However, the new Fit and Finish<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fit_and_Finish</ref> Test Day track will be holding its second event<ref>https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2009-07-21_Fit_and_Finish:Batteries_and_Suspend</ref>, on power management and suspend/resume. The Test Day page already includes several test scenarios, and a live CD for testing will soon be available. The Fit and Finish project is a great effort to improve the details of the Fedora project, so please show up to support this event! The Test Day will be held on 2009-07-21 (Tuesday) in IRC #fedora-fit-and-finish (note this is not the same channel where main track Test Days take place).


If you would like to propose a main track Test Day for the Fedora 12 cycle, please contact the QA team via email or IRC, or file a ticket in QA Trac<ref>https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/</ref>.
If you would like to propose a main track Test Day for the Fedora 12 cycle, please contact the QA team via email or IRC, or file a ticket in QA Trac<ref>https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/</ref>.
Line 20: Line 20:
=== Weekly meetings ===
=== Weekly meetings ===


The QA group weekly meeting<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings</ref> was held on 2009-07-01. The full log is available<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20090701</ref>. [[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] reported that he had not yet been able to update the QA Goals page<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Goals</ref>, but had started work on it and hoped to have it complete soon. He noted that he had completed his survey of feedback on the Test Day review questionnaire<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00009.html</ref>.
The QA group weekly meeting<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings</ref> was held on 2009-07-15. The full log is available<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20090715</ref>. [[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] reported that he had filed tickets to track the creation of the three Debugging pages identified as desirable by [[User:Beland|Christopher Beland]], and would mail the list to try and attract volunteers to work on the pages.


[[User:Wwoods|Will Woods]] reported that he had added two more test cases to the Rawhide acceptance test plan<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Rawhide_Acceptance_Test_Plan#Basic_Functionality</ref>, based on suggestions received to the initial plan: post-install networking and post-install input.
James also noted he is still working on the Goals page<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Goals</ref>, using a personal space draft<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Jlaska/Draft</ref>, but was not yet ready to go into production with it.


[[MatthiasClasen|Matthias Clasen]] reported on the new Fit and Finish project<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fit_and_Finish</ref>, discussed on mailing lists under the topic 'raising the bar'. He explained it would be based on a series of Test Days concentrating on user experience rather than developer-driven 'features', and hoped members of the QA team would come along to help drive testing. [[User:Johannbg|Jóhann Guðmundsson]] suggested that the Test Day pages should provide more instructions on what information to include with bug reports for the Fit and Finish topics.
James and [[User:jkeating|Jesse Keating]] reported on the revisions to the Fedora 12 schedule in terms of QA and release engineering. The latest revised schedules are available: QA<ref>http://poelstra.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-12/f-12-quality-tasks.html</ref> and release engineering<ref>http://poelstra.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-12/f-12-releng-tasks.html</ref>.


[[User:Wwoods|Will Woods]] gave a quick further update on the status of AutoQA (which includes the rawhide acceptance testing discussed earlier). He noted that the test plan was complete and seven of twelve test cases had been written. The next step is to start automating cases, which is waiting on the packaging of autotest. This is being tracked in a ticket<ref>https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/9</ref>. [[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] and [[User:jkeating|Jesse Keating]] are working on this together, and making good progress. Will hopes that by next week, all test cases will be written and one will be automated. He also noted he was working on how to allow manual test result reports, as there will inevitably be cases that cannot be automated.
James reminded the group about the then-forthcoming Alpha Blocker Bug Day, which would be held on 2009-07-17. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] suggested reviewing F12Blocker bugs (which block only the final release) to see if they should be promoted to blocking the Alpha release also. James brought up the question of the criteria for Alpha blocker bugs. After some discussion, there was general agreement to work on the basis of considering only high-severity bugs in critical path components (as defined by the Critical Path Packages Proposal<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Critical_Path_Packages_Proposal</ref>) as Alpha blockers.


[[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] reported on behalf of [[User:Liam|Liam Li]], on his draft for a installation test event SOP<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Liam/Draft_Install_Test_SOP</ref>. This is intended to document the procedure for running an event where multiple people work together in real time to test installation. James reported that Liam had produced an initial draft, and it had been revised with help from [[User:Beland|Christopher Beland]] and Niels Haase.
James mentioned that the Fedora 12 Test Day schedule is still currently lightly populated, but he and Adam have several events planned which have not yet been set down to specific dates.


Finally, [[User:Johannbg|Jóhann Guðmundsson]] reported on his project to improve the quality and quantity of information contained in bug reports<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Johannbg/QA/Improve_reporting</ref>. He had filed an RFE<ref>https://fedorahosted.org/abrt/ticket/53</ref> to improve the interface of abrt (the automated bug reporting tool). [[MatthiasClasen|Matthias Clasen]] suggested asking the Design team for help in further refining the interface, and [[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] pointed out they had come up with good suggestions for the SELinux troubleshooting GUI design<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Design/SETroubleshootUsabilityImprovements</ref>.  
[[User:Wwoods|Will Woods]] reported on the progress of the AutoQA project. He has now completed writing the test cases for the Rawhide Acceptance Test Plan<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Rawhide_Acceptance_Test_Plan</ref>. He is now starting to work on writing automated tests for these cases, using autotest. He pointed out that progress information can also be found in AutoQA trac<ref>https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/milestone/israwhidebroken.com</ref>.


The Bugzappers group weekly meeting<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/Meetings</ref> was held on 2009-06-30. The full log is available<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/Meetings/Minutes-2009-Jun-30</ref>.
Finally, the group discussed changing the meeting day and/or time. Adam suggested creating a matrix of possible times and having each interested member fill out the times at which they are available, as has been done by other groups in the past. James offered to create the matrix and notify the mailing list so that people could fill it in once it was ready.


Brennan Ashton reported on the status of the triage metric project. He had got FAS integration and component grouping implemented, but adding some features requested by [[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] had caused significant breakage which he was working on.
[[User:Johannbg|Jóhann Guðmundsson]] pointed out that the QA group could potentially be affected by the ongoing question about the use of Fedora trademarks in non-official spins, as it frequently generates non-official spins for use in Test Days. The group agreed to monitor this on an ongoing basis.


Niels Haase provided an update on his efforts to update the triage critical component list. He had written a draft<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Arxs/CPCL</ref> for a list based on the critical path component list being developed for that proposal, and proposed to add components from this list to the existing list<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/Components_and_Triagers</ref>. The group approved this in principle, but pointed out several components that should be removed as they do not make sense from the triage perspective, and also noted that any packages which the components in the list depend on should be considered for addition as well. Niels promised to provide a list of these dependencies for the next meeting.
No BugZappers meeting was held this week.


[[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] reported on the project to improve (and create) pages explaining how to debug problems in particular components, and what information to include when reporting bugs in these components. This had grown out of [[User:Johannbg|Jóhann Guðmundsson's]] 'improve reporting' proposal<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Johannbg/QA/Improve_reporting</ref>. He encouraged all group members to contribute to the page for their triage components, and create a page if there is not yet one. The page for X.org<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Xorg/Debugging</ref> was cited as a good example or template. Niels Haase mentioned a page for NetworkManager<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Arxs/NetworkManager/Debugging</ref> currently in draft status. Adam also mentioned he had received a proposal from Ubuntu's James Westby for the distributions to work together on combining their pages of this type, and contributing them to the original upstream projects. The group agreed this was a good idea in principle and they would wait for further information from James, relayed via Adam.
The next QA weekly meeting will be held on 2009-07-22 at 1600 UTC in #fedora-meeting, and the next Bugzappers weekly meeting on 2009-07-21 at 1500 UTC in #fedora-meeting.


[[User:Mcepl|Matej Cepl]] reported that the latest rewrite of the triage team GreaseMonkey script was nearly complete, and appealed for volunteers to help test it.
<references/>
 
=== F12 Alpha blocker bug review meeting ===
 
[[User:poelstra|John Poelstra]] announced<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00239.html</ref> the first blocker bug review meeting for Fedora 12, to be held on 2009-07-17, mainly to review blocker bug status for the upcoming Alpha release. Later, [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] posted a recap of the meeting<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00347.html</ref>, recording that it had been well attended and had been able to review the whole F12 Alpha and main blocker lists, remove some from the lists, promote some to block the Alpha release, and check on the development status of several bugs.
 
<references/>
 
=== Updated list of components for priority triage ===
 
Niels Haase announced<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00255.html</ref> that he had updated his proposed expansion of the list of priority components for the Bugzappers group to focus on triaging<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Arxs/CPCL</ref>, based on the Critical Path Packages Proposal, as previously approved at Bugzappers meetings.
 
<references/>
 
=== Xfce spin testing ===
 
[[User:maxamillion| Adam Miller]] announced<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00251.html</ref> that, he would be building a test live image with the Xfce desktop roughly each week, and would appreciate testing and reporting of problems. He also included a link to the first build.
 
<references/>
 
=== What to do with Fedora 11 target bugs ===
 
[[User:poelstra|John Poelstra]] pointed out<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00259.html</ref> that the F11Target bug<ref>http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=446451</ref> was still open (and depending on 321 bugs), and asked what people thought should be done about it. Niels Haase suggested<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00260.html</ref> moving all that had been triaged to F12Target. [[User:Markmc|Mark McLoughlin]] suggested<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00265.html</ref> having F11Target block F12Target, effectively moving the bugs to F12Target wholesale. [[MatthiasClasen|Matthias Clasen]] opined that "I don't think it makes sense to accumulate hundreds of bugs on the target tracker, if they only end up getting pushed from release to release"<ref>https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00267.html</ref>. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] agreed, and suggested<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00270.html</ref> just closing the tracker bug, as had been done for Fedora 9 and Fedora 10. No final decision was yet reached.
 
<references/>
 
=== QA meeting time/date adjustment ===
 
As discussed at the weekly meeting, [[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] announced<ref>https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00304.html</ref> that he had created a matrix to track possible new times and days for the QA group weekly meeting, and asked everyone interested in attending the meetings to fill out the matrix with the days and times when they are available.
 
<references/>


[[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] reported that the project to implement use of the severity and priority fields in Bugzilla was now more or less complete, and asked all triagers if they had not already to begin assessing the severity of bugs when triaging them. He referred to the instructions on this in the Triage Guide<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/How_to_Triage</ref> on how to assign severity appropriately.
=== Anaconda triage project progress ===


The next QA weekly meeting will be held on 2009-07-08 at 1600 UTC in #fedora-meeting, and the next Bugzappers weekly meeting on 2009-07-07 at 1500 UTC in #fedora-meeting.
[[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] reported<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00308.html</ref> on the progress of the ongoing project to integrate anaconda triage into the Bugzappers group and workflow. He thanked [[User:andyl|Andy Lindeberg]] for her efforts in joining the mailing list, weekly meetings and IRC channel, and in working to codify the current workflow used to triage anaconda bugs. He recorded that meeting and email discussions had revealed little in the way of fundamental conflicts between the official Bugzappers workflow<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow</ref> and the Anaconda workflow<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Anaconda/AnacondaBugWorkflow</ref>. He had therefore modified the components and triagers page<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/Components_and_Triagers</ref> to list the Anaconda workflow page as the special instructions for triaging anaconda, and note that additional triagers are now welcome for anaconda if someone has a burning desire to work on it, although Andy is currently covering the area very effectively.


<references/>
<references/>


=== Test Day survey results ===
=== Bugzilla semantics debate ===


[[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] posted<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00009.html</ref> a round-up of the results of his survey on the Fedora 11 cycle Test Days. It provides an overview and summary of the feedback received both publicly and privately in response to the survey.
[[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] asked the list<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00309.html</ref> about a question he had been discussing with [[User:andyl|Andy Lindeberg]], regarding the semantics of the NEW and ASSIGNED states in Bugzilla. He proposed the use of a keyword (instead of the ASSIGNED state) to indicate a bug has been triaged, and either removing the ASSIGNED state entirely, or noting in the workflow page that it has no real function and is effectively equivalent to NEW. This led to an enthusiastic debate, with many other proposals made, although all seemed to agree that the current state of ASSIGNED meaning that a bug has been triaged is not optimal. No final consensus was yet reached on what changes, if any, to propose to the configuration of Bugzilla and/or the official workflow.


<references/>
<references/>

Revision as of 00:25, 18 July 2009

QualityAssurance

In this section, we cover the activities of the QA team[1].

Contributing Writer: Adam Williamson

  1. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA

Test Days

There was no Test Day last week.

No Test Day is scheduled on the main track next week. However, the new Fit and Finish[1] Test Day track will be holding its second event[2], on power management and suspend/resume. The Test Day page already includes several test scenarios, and a live CD for testing will soon be available. The Fit and Finish project is a great effort to improve the details of the Fedora project, so please show up to support this event! The Test Day will be held on 2009-07-21 (Tuesday) in IRC #fedora-fit-and-finish (note this is not the same channel where main track Test Days take place).

If you would like to propose a main track Test Day for the Fedora 12 cycle, please contact the QA team via email or IRC, or file a ticket in QA Trac[3].

  1. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fit_and_Finish
  2. ↑ https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2009-07-21_Fit_and_Finish:Batteries_and_Suspend
  3. ↑ https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/

Weekly meetings

The QA group weekly meeting[1] was held on 2009-07-15. The full log is available[2]. James Laska reported that he had filed tickets to track the creation of the three Debugging pages identified as desirable by Christopher Beland, and would mail the list to try and attract volunteers to work on the pages.

James also noted he is still working on the Goals page[3], using a personal space draft[4], but was not yet ready to go into production with it.

James and Jesse Keating reported on the revisions to the Fedora 12 schedule in terms of QA and release engineering. The latest revised schedules are available: QA[5] and release engineering[6].

James reminded the group about the then-forthcoming Alpha Blocker Bug Day, which would be held on 2009-07-17. Adam Williamson suggested reviewing F12Blocker bugs (which block only the final release) to see if they should be promoted to blocking the Alpha release also. James brought up the question of the criteria for Alpha blocker bugs. After some discussion, there was general agreement to work on the basis of considering only high-severity bugs in critical path components (as defined by the Critical Path Packages Proposal[7]) as Alpha blockers.

James mentioned that the Fedora 12 Test Day schedule is still currently lightly populated, but he and Adam have several events planned which have not yet been set down to specific dates.

Will Woods reported on the progress of the AutoQA project. He has now completed writing the test cases for the Rawhide Acceptance Test Plan[8]. He is now starting to work on writing automated tests for these cases, using autotest. He pointed out that progress information can also be found in AutoQA trac[9].

Finally, the group discussed changing the meeting day and/or time. Adam suggested creating a matrix of possible times and having each interested member fill out the times at which they are available, as has been done by other groups in the past. James offered to create the matrix and notify the mailing list so that people could fill it in once it was ready.

Jóhann Guðmundsson pointed out that the QA group could potentially be affected by the ongoing question about the use of Fedora trademarks in non-official spins, as it frequently generates non-official spins for use in Test Days. The group agreed to monitor this on an ongoing basis.

No BugZappers meeting was held this week.

The next QA weekly meeting will be held on 2009-07-22 at 1600 UTC in #fedora-meeting, and the next Bugzappers weekly meeting on 2009-07-21 at 1500 UTC in #fedora-meeting.

  1. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings
  2. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20090715
  3. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Goals
  4. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Jlaska/Draft
  5. ↑ http://poelstra.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-12/f-12-quality-tasks.html
  6. ↑ http://poelstra.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-12/f-12-releng-tasks.html
  7. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Critical_Path_Packages_Proposal
  8. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Rawhide_Acceptance_Test_Plan
  9. ↑ https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/milestone/israwhidebroken.com

F12 Alpha blocker bug review meeting

John Poelstra announced[1] the first blocker bug review meeting for Fedora 12, to be held on 2009-07-17, mainly to review blocker bug status for the upcoming Alpha release. Later, Adam Williamson posted a recap of the meeting[2], recording that it had been well attended and had been able to review the whole F12 Alpha and main blocker lists, remove some from the lists, promote some to block the Alpha release, and check on the development status of several bugs.

  1. ↑ http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00239.html
  2. ↑ http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00347.html

Updated list of components for priority triage

Niels Haase announced[1] that he had updated his proposed expansion of the list of priority components for the Bugzappers group to focus on triaging[2], based on the Critical Path Packages Proposal, as previously approved at Bugzappers meetings.

  1. ↑ http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00255.html
  2. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Arxs/CPCL

Xfce spin testing

Adam Miller announced[1] that, he would be building a test live image with the Xfce desktop roughly each week, and would appreciate testing and reporting of problems. He also included a link to the first build.

  1. ↑ http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00251.html

What to do with Fedora 11 target bugs

John Poelstra pointed out[1] that the F11Target bug[2] was still open (and depending on 321 bugs), and asked what people thought should be done about it. Niels Haase suggested[3] moving all that had been triaged to F12Target. Mark McLoughlin suggested[4] having F11Target block F12Target, effectively moving the bugs to F12Target wholesale. Matthias Clasen opined that "I don't think it makes sense to accumulate hundreds of bugs on the target tracker, if they only end up getting pushed from release to release"[5]. Adam Williamson agreed, and suggested[6] just closing the tracker bug, as had been done for Fedora 9 and Fedora 10. No final decision was yet reached.

  1. ↑ http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00259.html
  2. ↑ http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=446451
  3. ↑ http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00260.html
  4. ↑ http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00265.html
  5. ↑ https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00267.html
  6. ↑ http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00270.html

QA meeting time/date adjustment

As discussed at the weekly meeting, James Laska announced[1] that he had created a matrix to track possible new times and days for the QA group weekly meeting, and asked everyone interested in attending the meetings to fill out the matrix with the days and times when they are available.

  1. ↑ https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00304.html

Anaconda triage project progress

Adam Williamson reported[1] on the progress of the ongoing project to integrate anaconda triage into the Bugzappers group and workflow. He thanked Andy Lindeberg for her efforts in joining the mailing list, weekly meetings and IRC channel, and in working to codify the current workflow used to triage anaconda bugs. He recorded that meeting and email discussions had revealed little in the way of fundamental conflicts between the official Bugzappers workflow[2] and the Anaconda workflow[3]. He had therefore modified the components and triagers page[4] to list the Anaconda workflow page as the special instructions for triaging anaconda, and note that additional triagers are now welcome for anaconda if someone has a burning desire to work on it, although Andy is currently covering the area very effectively.

  1. ↑ http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00308.html
  2. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow
  3. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Anaconda/AnacondaBugWorkflow
  4. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/Components_and_Triagers

Bugzilla semantics debate

Adam Williamson asked the list[1] about a question he had been discussing with Andy Lindeberg, regarding the semantics of the NEW and ASSIGNED states in Bugzilla. He proposed the use of a keyword (instead of the ASSIGNED state) to indicate a bug has been triaged, and either removing the ASSIGNED state entirely, or noting in the workflow page that it has no real function and is effectively equivalent to NEW. This led to an enthusiastic debate, with many other proposals made, although all seemed to agree that the current state of ASSIGNED meaning that a bug has been triaged is not optimal. No final consensus was yet reached on what changes, if any, to propose to the configuration of Bugzilla and/or the official workflow.

  1. ↑ http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-July/msg00309.html
Retrieved from "https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=FWN/Beats/QualityAssurance&oldid=114080"