From Fedora Project Wiki

< FWN‎ | Beats

(create 191 qa beat)
(create fwn 288 draft)
 
(95 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
== QualityAssurance ==
== QualityAssurance ==


In this section, we cover the activities of the QA team<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA</ref>.
In this section, we cover the activities of the QA team<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA</ref>. For more information on the work of the QA team and how you can get involved, see the Joining page<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Join</ref>.
 
We apologize for the lack of a QA section for the last few issues of FWN: the QA team was very busy with Fedora 16 validation testing. This issue catches up with the QA team news from the last several weeks.


Contributing Writer: [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]]
Contributing Writer: [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]]
Line 10: Line 12:
=== Test Days ===
=== Test Days ===


Last week's main track Test Day<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2009-08-27_Dracut</ref> was on Dracut<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ABRT</ref>, the new initrd generation tool. There was a solid turnout of testers and developers. Many cases were tested to work without problems, but some problem cases were identified, and bugs were filed.
In the past few weeks, we finished up the Fedora 16 Test Day schedule, with Graphics Test Week taking place at the start of September<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-06_Nouveau</ref> ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-07_Radeon</ref> ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-07_Radeon</ref>, virtualization test day taking place on 2011-09-15<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-15_Virtualization</ref>, another i18n desktop test day on 2011-09-22<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-22_I18n_Desktop</ref>, an ABRT test day on 2011-09-26<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-26_ABRT</ref>, a power management test day on 2011-09-29<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-29_PowerManagement</ref>, printing test day on 2011-10-06<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-10-06_Printing</ref>, Fedora packager plugin for Eclipse test day on 2011-10-13<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-10-13_Fedora_Packager_for_Eclipse</ref>, and Cloud SIG test day on 2011-10-20<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-10-20_Cloud_SIG_Test_Day</ref>. Most of these test days passed off successfully with the work of the developers behind them, despite the QA team being very busy, so many thanks to those who organized and carried out these events, and those who turned up to do the testing.


Next week's main track Test Day<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2009-09-03_SoaS</ref> will be on Sugar on a Stick, the Fedora-derived USB stick distribution which features the Sugar desktop environment that is the default desktop for the OLPC project. This Test Day is being led by the Sugar developers. If you're interested in this exciting and innovative desktop environment, please come along and help test it! The testing will be on Sugar on a Stick v2 Beta, which should be available in time for the Test Day. The Test Day will be held on Thursday 2009-09-03 in IRC #fedora-test-day.
The Fedora 17 Test Day cycle has not yet started. We welcome proposals for test days for the Fedora 17 cycle, and we usually accept all the proposals that are made. You can propose a test day for almost anything, and organize it yourself following the handy guide we provide<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/SOP_Test_Day_management</ref>, or alternatively we can help out with the organization of the event. Information on how to propose a test day is available on the Wiki<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Test_Days/Create</ref>.
 
<references/>


Next week's Fit and Finish<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fit_and_Finish</ref> project Test Day<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2009-09-01_Sectool</ref> will be on Sectool<ref>http://fedorahosted.org/sectool</ref>, the security audit and intrusion detection tool. The Fit and Finish team are working throughout the Fedora 12 cycle to file the rough edges off Fedora's desktop experience, so please come along and help them test! The Test Day will be held on Tuesday 2009-09-01 in IRC #fedora-test-day.
=== Fedora 16 preparation ===


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>http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/</ref>.
As mentioned above, Fedora 16 release validation took up almost all of the QA team's time during the last few months, with very challenging Beta and Final releases. There were a total of 12 candidate builds for Beta and Final combined, and the whole team put in tireless work running the set of validation tests against each build and then investigating and verifying the large number of blocker bugs identified. The team was able to contribute to the release eventually going ahead with only a one week slip to the Beta schedule and no slip of the Final schedule, a considerable achievement in the light of the many complex changes in the Fedora 16 feature list.


<references/>
<references/>


=== Weekly meetings ===
=== Release criteria updates ===
 
Largely as a result of the Fedora 16 validation process, there were several adjustments and additions to the release criteria in recent weeks. After discussion of the proposed kickstart / unattended installation release criterion concluded, [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] reported that he had committed his proposed modifications<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102599.html</ref>. He also committed a change to reflect the increased priority of EFI installations from Fedora 17 onwards<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102600.html</ref>.
 
Adam also passed on a suggestion from [[User:Pjones|Peter Jones]] to improve the clarity of the virtualization criteria<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102601.html</ref>. After an extensive discussion, an elegant wording suggestion from Albert Graham<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102636.html</ref> was eventually accepted and committed<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103680.html</ref>.
 
[[User:Tflink|Tim Flink]] raised the question to what extent support for Xen virtualization should be included in the release criteria<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/103127.html</ref>. After a similarly enthusiastic discussion, it was eventually agreed that Xen DomU support - effectively, the ability to install successfully as a Xen guest - should be a Final release criterion<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103678.html</ref>.
 
Adam also proposed downgrading some rarely-used kickstart deployment methods from Beta to Final in the criteria, requiring only the most commonly-used to be working at Beta stage<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103557.html</ref>.
 
Finally, Adam proposed a criterion for i18n (translation) issues<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103588.html</ref>. After discussion, the proposal was agreed upon at a blocker review meeting later in the week<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103679.html</ref>.
 
<references/>


The QA group weekly meeting<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings</ref> was held on 2009-08-24. The full log is available<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20090824</ref>. [[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] led a post-Alpha release recap (on the assumption the Fedora 12 Alpha would in fact be released on time). The group agreed that the process had been handled quite well. [[User:jkeating|Jesse Keating]] was happy with the level of communication between release engineering and QA. James felt the blocker bug review meetings had gone smoothly and been a positive contribution. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] thought the Alpha process had flagged up the need for a better process for filtering Anaconda updates into Fedora. James summarized areas of possible improvement: he felt planned testing could be extended to areas beyond installation. The group agreed, but generally felt that installation was the most important area by a significant margin. James committed to trying to extend the test plan to cover X.org testing for the Fedora 12 Beta release. [[User:Wwoods|Will Woods]] pointed out that basic X functionality was part of the Rawhide acceptance test plan, and suggested that the Rawhide acceptances tests should be considered a prerequisite to the installation testing.
=== Update policy changes ===


[[User:Wwoods|Will Woods]] reported on the progress of the AutoQA project. He noted that the automated tests were still running and sending results to the mailing list<ref>http://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/autoqa-results</ref>. He had fixed bugs in several of the tests, and improved the subject lines of the result emails. He was still engaged in tracing other bugs in the existing tests, and writing documentation for creating tests and hooks. [[User:jkeating|Jesse Keating]] pointed out that a new upstream release of autotest was available, and committed to getting it packaged and made available through the infrastructure team for testing. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] asked whether the current state of the project was sufficient for the planned israwhidebroken.com website to be created. Will explained that some bits were still missing, particularly a method for getting data from autotest into the page.
In September, [[User:Karsten|Karsten Hopp]] raised the issue of a security update for Fedora 14 which had been languishing in the updates-testing repository for some time<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102493.html</ref>. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] explained that the amount of testers working on older releases was limited, and that the actual karma requirements for updates to be accepted were controlled by FESCo (the Fedora engineering steering committee), not the QA group<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102497.html</ref>. [[User:Cra|Chuck Anderson]] noted that he had the update in question installed, but was struggling for lack of information on how to test it properly<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102503.html</ref>. [[User:Sundaram|Rahul Sundaram]] suggested that Karsten file a ticket with FESCo to raise the issue<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102502.html</ref>, and Karsten did<ref>http://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/664</ref>.


[[User:dpravec|David Pravec]] proposed creating a fedora-test-announce mailing list for those who wanted to be informed of events such as Test Days, but did not want to follow the traffic of fedora-test-list. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] suggested using the list to announce test composes and changes to release schedules. [[User:jkeating|Jesse Keating]] worried about the principle of creating more and more mailing lists, and suggested posting announcements to fedora-devel-announce instead, but [[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] said he had been asked to stop posting Test Day announcements to that list in the past. In the end the group agreed on the proposal, and David took responsibility for creating the list.
That ticket was merged with another similar one reported by Doug Ledford<ref>http://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/667</ref>, which became a topic of concern to FESCo. After several rounds of discussions, FESCo first decided to relax the requirements for critical path updates somewhat by allowing them to be sent through to the stable repository without the 'required' karma after a period of two weeks had elapsed<ref>http://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/642</ref>, and later proposed removing the requirement for critical path updates to receive positive karma from a proven tester<ref>http://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/667#comment:26</ref>, effectively a proposal to end the proven tester system, as this is the only function it serves.


[[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] asked for an update on Test Day status. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] reported that the Fit and Finish team's Printing Test Day<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2009-08-18_Fit_and_Finish:Printing</ref> had gone smoothly, from what he had seen. James linked to his report<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-August/msg00609.html</ref> on the ABRT Test Day<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2009-08-20_ABRT</ref>, and thanked [[User:dpravec|David Pravec]] and [[User:Kparal|Kamil Paral]] for organizing the event. James also reported on the readiness of the upcoming Dracut Test Day<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2009-08-27_Dracut</ref>.
The QA group discussed this proposal at the weekly meeting of 2011-11-07<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20111107</ref>, agreeing that, while they had some reservations about the proposal, they were not definitely opposed to it, and recognized that critical path updates not receiving the currently-required karma is a significant problem.


[[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] raised the topic of the recently-introduced nightly live builds of Rawhide<ref>http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/</ref>, and asked the group to support him in publicising their existence. [[User:jkeating|Jesse Keating]] worried that the limited resources of the server on which they are hosted would be put under serious strain if they become too widely used. This led to another discussion of the best way to distribute regularly updated large images to a mass user base. As usual, no definite answers were discovered. [[User:Kevin|Kevin Fenzi]] wondered if DeltaISOs would help, but Jesse explained they would not, due to the contents of a live image as compared to an installation image (live images essentially contain one large file that is an image of an entire filesystem, while installation images contain individual package files, and hence are much more amenable to having their size reduced by DeltaISOs).
<references/>


[[User:dpravec|David Pravec]] wanted to improve on the reporting of results of Test Days. He felt that having a results table which was essentially a set of Bugzilla links at the bottom of each Test Day page was unnecessary repetition of work. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] pointed out that the results tables for some Test Days contained significantly more information than simply links to bug reports. David's suggestion was to automate the linking of Bugzilla reports to the Test Day Wiki pages in some way. Adam felt this might be theoretically possible, but technically difficult without undesirable significant modifications to Bugzilla. [[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] noted that reporting results to the Wiki pages was only ever intended to be an interim solution, and the group was still officially committed to implementing a proper test case management system, which should render the problem irrelevant. In the meantime, James and Adam were both happy to accept any improvements anyone could propose for the Wiki-based system. David promised to work on providing a practical proposal.
=== Update candidate notification ===


The Bugzappers group weekly meeting<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/Meetings</ref> was held on 2009-08-25. The full log is available<ref>http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2009-08-25/fedora-meeting.2009-08-25-15.06.log.html</ref>. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] gave an update on the proposal to add the semantics switchover to the QA team calendar. He noted that the public Google calendar the QA team had run for a short time was now mostly unused and had only been intended as a test. He further noted that the Infrastructure group was still working on providing a project-wide calendaring solution. Niels Haase clarified that he had in mind the short lists of tasks and dates related to specific groups<ref>http://poelstra.fedorapeople.org/schedules/</ref> that are published by the release engineering team. Adam said he could have the switchover added to these Fedora 13 schedules once they were created.
Samuel Greenfeld asked if there was any system to notify testers of new candidate updates for specific packages, and to determine what packages are being actively used on a system<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102981.html</ref>. There were no takers for the second question, but for the first, [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] suggested using yum parameters that would allow one to specify only certain packages be pulled from the updates-testing repository<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102982.html</ref>, and [[User:till|Till Maas]] pointed out that Bodhi can actually provide per-package RSS notifications<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102992.html</ref>.


[[User:Rjune|Richard June]] gave an update on the kernel triage project. He had started on his work of triaging wireless related bugs. So far he had found that most reports were either very old, or were valid reports which already included all necessary information and hence did not need to be triaged. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] suggested that he continue on wireless bugs for a while, and if the same pattern persisted, try a different kernel component instead. If several kernel components all seemed to be in the same state, the value of continuing with the kernel triage project could be re-evaluated.
<references/>


[[User:Tk009|Edward Kirk]] said that he was working on an SOP (standard operating procedure) detailing all aspects of arranging the Bugzappers group meetings, and asked the group if it had particular ideas or suggestions about any part of the process. In general everyone agreed the current process was good and was happy that Edward was working on officially documenting it. Edward promised to submit a draft of the SOP to the mailing list or a future meeting for review.
=== Proven tester meetings ===


[[User:Tk009|Edward Kirk]] suggested having meetbot announce Bugzappers meetings in related channels shortly ahead of the meeting. [[User:Kevin|Kevin Fenzi]] and [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] worried that this might annoy people, and also considered the dystopian possibilities of a world where all projects announced all their meetings in all relevant channels. The proposal was not taken further.
As a response to the concerns about candidate updates not receiving enough karma, [[User:Kevin|Kevin Fenzi]] ran a series of weekly proven tester meetups<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102869.html</ref> from 2011-09-21 to 2011-10-26. Recaps of these meetings are available in the mailing list archives<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/103000.html</ref> <ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103341.html</ref> <ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103585.html</ref> <ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103840.html</ref> <ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/104043.html</ref>.


The next QA weekly meeting will be held on 2009-08-31 at 1600 UTC in #fedora-meeting, and the next Bugzappers weekly meeting on 2009-09-01 at 1500 UTC in #fedora-meeting.
Kevin also proposed an updates-testing-info mailing list, containing only the mails about new packages in updates-testing<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/103163.html</ref>. However, the consensus was against the idea, as it was felt that it was easy enough to simply filter the desired mails from the test mailing list for those who did not want to read the other traffic.


<references/>
<references/>


=== ABRT Test Day report ===
=== QA group representation at FUDCon Pune ===


[[User:dpravec|David Pravec]] and [[User:Kparal|Kamil Paral]] reported<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-August/msg00609.html</ref> on the ABRT Test Day held on 2009-08-20, with a list of all bugs reported during the Test Day and their current statuses. They were happy with the success of the Test Day.
[[User:Ankursinha|Ankur Sinha]] asked whether anyone from the QA team would be present at the upcoming FUDCon in Pune, India and able to do a presentation on the group's activities<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103712.html</ref>. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] replied that unfortunately none of the Red Hat team would be at the conference, but encouraged Ankur to take a shot at giving a presentation himself<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103728.html</ref>. A S Alam then stepped up to volunteer to lead a QA session<ref>http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103739.html</ref>. His session was scheduled for 2011-11-04<ref>http://fudcon.in/sessions/fedora-testing</ref>, but we have no report on the event - if you were present, please write to the mailing list and let us know how it went!


<references/>
<references/>

Latest revision as of 05:10, 17 November 2011

QualityAssurance

In this section, we cover the activities of the QA team[1]. For more information on the work of the QA team and how you can get involved, see the Joining page[2].

We apologize for the lack of a QA section for the last few issues of FWN: the QA team was very busy with Fedora 16 validation testing. This issue catches up with the QA team news from the last several weeks.

Contributing Writer: Adam Williamson

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

Test Days

In the past few weeks, we finished up the Fedora 16 Test Day schedule, with Graphics Test Week taking place at the start of September[1] ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-07_Radeon</ref> ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-07_Radeon</ref>, virtualization test day taking place on 2011-09-15[2], another i18n desktop test day on 2011-09-22[3], an ABRT test day on 2011-09-26[4], a power management test day on 2011-09-29[5], printing test day on 2011-10-06[6], Fedora packager plugin for Eclipse test day on 2011-10-13[7], and Cloud SIG test day on 2011-10-20[8]. Most of these test days passed off successfully with the work of the developers behind them, despite the QA team being very busy, so many thanks to those who organized and carried out these events, and those who turned up to do the testing.

The Fedora 17 Test Day cycle has not yet started. We welcome proposals for test days for the Fedora 17 cycle, and we usually accept all the proposals that are made. You can propose a test day for almost anything, and organize it yourself following the handy guide we provide[9], or alternatively we can help out with the organization of the event. Information on how to propose a test day is available on the Wiki[10].

  1. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-06_Nouveau
  2. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-15_Virtualization
  3. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-22_I18n_Desktop
  4. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-26_ABRT
  5. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-29_PowerManagement
  6. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-10-06_Printing
  7. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-10-13_Fedora_Packager_for_Eclipse
  8. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-10-20_Cloud_SIG_Test_Day
  9. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/SOP_Test_Day_management
  10. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Test_Days/Create

Fedora 16 preparation

As mentioned above, Fedora 16 release validation took up almost all of the QA team's time during the last few months, with very challenging Beta and Final releases. There were a total of 12 candidate builds for Beta and Final combined, and the whole team put in tireless work running the set of validation tests against each build and then investigating and verifying the large number of blocker bugs identified. The team was able to contribute to the release eventually going ahead with only a one week slip to the Beta schedule and no slip of the Final schedule, a considerable achievement in the light of the many complex changes in the Fedora 16 feature list.


Release criteria updates

Largely as a result of the Fedora 16 validation process, there were several adjustments and additions to the release criteria in recent weeks. After discussion of the proposed kickstart / unattended installation release criterion concluded, Adam Williamson reported that he had committed his proposed modifications[1]. He also committed a change to reflect the increased priority of EFI installations from Fedora 17 onwards[2].

Adam also passed on a suggestion from Peter Jones to improve the clarity of the virtualization criteria[3]. After an extensive discussion, an elegant wording suggestion from Albert Graham[4] was eventually accepted and committed[5].

Tim Flink raised the question to what extent support for Xen virtualization should be included in the release criteria[6]. After a similarly enthusiastic discussion, it was eventually agreed that Xen DomU support - effectively, the ability to install successfully as a Xen guest - should be a Final release criterion[7].

Adam also proposed downgrading some rarely-used kickstart deployment methods from Beta to Final in the criteria, requiring only the most commonly-used to be working at Beta stage[8].

Finally, Adam proposed a criterion for i18n (translation) issues[9]. After discussion, the proposal was agreed upon at a blocker review meeting later in the week[10].

  1. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102599.html
  2. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102600.html
  3. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102601.html
  4. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102636.html
  5. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103680.html
  6. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/103127.html
  7. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103678.html
  8. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103557.html
  9. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103588.html
  10. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103679.html

Update policy changes

In September, Karsten Hopp raised the issue of a security update for Fedora 14 which had been languishing in the updates-testing repository for some time[1]. Adam Williamson explained that the amount of testers working on older releases was limited, and that the actual karma requirements for updates to be accepted were controlled by FESCo (the Fedora engineering steering committee), not the QA group[2]. Chuck Anderson noted that he had the update in question installed, but was struggling for lack of information on how to test it properly[3]. Rahul Sundaram suggested that Karsten file a ticket with FESCo to raise the issue[4], and Karsten did[5].

That ticket was merged with another similar one reported by Doug Ledford[6], which became a topic of concern to FESCo. After several rounds of discussions, FESCo first decided to relax the requirements for critical path updates somewhat by allowing them to be sent through to the stable repository without the 'required' karma after a period of two weeks had elapsed[7], and later proposed removing the requirement for critical path updates to receive positive karma from a proven tester[8], effectively a proposal to end the proven tester system, as this is the only function it serves.

The QA group discussed this proposal at the weekly meeting of 2011-11-07[9], agreeing that, while they had some reservations about the proposal, they were not definitely opposed to it, and recognized that critical path updates not receiving the currently-required karma is a significant problem.

  1. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102493.html
  2. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102497.html
  3. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102503.html
  4. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102502.html
  5. ↑ http://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/664
  6. ↑ http://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/667
  7. ↑ http://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/642
  8. ↑ http://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/667#comment:26
  9. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20111107

Update candidate notification

Samuel Greenfeld asked if there was any system to notify testers of new candidate updates for specific packages, and to determine what packages are being actively used on a system[1]. There were no takers for the second question, but for the first, Adam Williamson suggested using yum parameters that would allow one to specify only certain packages be pulled from the updates-testing repository[2], and Till Maas pointed out that Bodhi can actually provide per-package RSS notifications[3].

  1. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102981.html
  2. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102982.html
  3. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102992.html

Proven tester meetings

As a response to the concerns about candidate updates not receiving enough karma, Kevin Fenzi ran a series of weekly proven tester meetups[1] from 2011-09-21 to 2011-10-26. Recaps of these meetings are available in the mailing list archives[2] [3] [4] [5] [6].

Kevin also proposed an updates-testing-info mailing list, containing only the mails about new packages in updates-testing[7]. However, the consensus was against the idea, as it was felt that it was easy enough to simply filter the desired mails from the test mailing list for those who did not want to read the other traffic.

  1. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102869.html
  2. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/103000.html
  3. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103341.html
  4. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103585.html
  5. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103840.html
  6. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/104043.html
  7. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/103163.html

QA group representation at FUDCon Pune

Ankur Sinha asked whether anyone from the QA team would be present at the upcoming FUDCon in Pune, India and able to do a presentation on the group's activities[1]. Adam Williamson replied that unfortunately none of the Red Hat team would be at the conference, but encouraged Ankur to take a shot at giving a presentation himself[2]. A S Alam then stepped up to volunteer to lead a QA session[3]. His session was scheduled for 2011-11-04[4], but we have no report on the event - if you were present, please write to the mailing list and let us know how it went!

  1. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103712.html
  2. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103728.html
  3. ↑ http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103739.html
  4. ↑ http://fudcon.in/sessions/fedora-testing
Retrieved from "https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=FWN/Beats/QualityAssurance&oldid=261435"