FWN/Beats/QualityAssurance: Difference between revisions

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

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].

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].

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.

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].

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.

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] ttp://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA

[2] ttp://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Join

[3] ttp://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-06_Nouveau

[4] ttp://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-15_Virtualization

[5] ttp://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-22_I18n_Desktop

[6] ttp://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-26_ABRT

[7] ttp://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-29_PowerManagement

[8] ttp://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-10-06_Printing

[9] ttp://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-10-13_Fedora_Packager_for_Eclipse

[10] ttp://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-10-20_Cloud_SIG_Test_Day

[11] ttp://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/SOP_Test_Day_management

[12] ttp://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Test_Days/Create

[13] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102599.html

[14] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102600.html

[15] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102601.html

[16] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102636.html

[17] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103680.html

[18] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/103127.html

[19] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103678.html

[20] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103557.html

[21] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103588.html

[22] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103679.html

[23] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102493.html

[24] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102497.html

[25] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102503.html

[26] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102502.html

[27] ttp://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/664

[28] ttp://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/667

[29] ttp://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/642

[30] ttp://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/667#comment:26

[31] ttp://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20111107

[32] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102981.html

[33] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102982.html

[34] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102992.html

[35] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/102869.html

[36] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/103000.html

[37] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103341.html

[38] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103585.html

[39] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103840.html

[40] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/104043.html

[41] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-September/103163.html

[42] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103712.html

[43] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103728.html

[44] ttp://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-October/103739.html

[45] ttp://fudcon.in/sessions/fedora-testing

[1]

[2]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 == 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]]
@@ Line 10: / Line 12: @@
 === Test Days ===
-Last week's Test Day<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2009-10-01_Anaconda/Features/StorageFiltering</ref> was on the installer's (Anaconda) storage system. Unfortunately not a huge number of testers were present for this test day, but those who did come managed to test a range of scenarios and file several important bug reports. Thanks to all testers.
+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 Test Day<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2009-10-08</ref> on 2009-10-08 will be specifically on the use of software RAID arrays with Anaconda. As always, the Test Day will run all day in the #fedora-test-day IRC channel. This is a nice tightly focused topic with clear test cases, and an important feature for many users, so please come out to the Test Day and help us ensure softward RAID is tested on a wide range of storage hardware and configurations.
-No Fit and Finish track Test Day is planned for next week.
-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>.
+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/>
-=== Weekly meetings ===
+=== Fedora 16 preparation ===
-The QA group weekly meeting<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings</ref> was held on 2009-09-28. The full log is available<ref>http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2009-09-28/fedora-meeting.2009-09-28-16.00.log.html</ref>. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] noted that follow-up on the development issues discussed the previous week was impossible with [[User:jkeating|Jesse Keating]] and [[User:dpravec|David Pravec]] absent, so left the topic for the following week.
+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.
-[[User:Wwoods|Will Woods]] reported on the progress of the AutoQA project. The major achievement was a working prototype of the planned israwhidebroken.com site, of which Will provided a screenshot<ref>http://wwoods.fedorapeople.org/screenshots/irb.png</ref>. The source code for the web application which controls the page is also available<ref>http://fedorapeople.org/gitweb?p=wwoods/public_git/israwhidebroken.git;a=summary</ref>. The app allows results for manual-only tests to be provided by users authenticated via FAS. Will is planning to extend the app to provide links to logs for the automated tests, and the ability to add bug report links for failed tests. Two new tests<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Anaconda_package_install_test_case</ref> <ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Anaconda_bootloader_setup_test_case</ref> had been added to cover the later stages of Anaconda installation (beyond disk partitioning).
+<references/>
-[[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] summarized upcoming events, and [[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] pointed out the relevant calendar page<ref>http://poelstra.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-12/f-12-quality-tasks.html</ref>. The beta freeze and beta candidate build process was imminent, and the fourth beta blocker review meeting was due Friday 2009-10-02. Denise Dumas pointed out that some important bugs required testing to confirm prospective fixes, and Adam pointed to the beta blocker bug list<ref>http://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=507678&hide_resolved=1</ref> as a reference for these.
-[[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] started a discussion regarding plans for the then-upcoming Anaconda storage filtering Test Day<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2009-10-01_Anaconda/Features/StorageFiltering</ref>. Denise Dumas was in favour of cancelling it as the storage filtering changes had been delayed until Fedora 13. James and [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] suggested converting it into a more general test day on Anaconda storage issues, and this path was agreed upon. James and Denise agreed to work to ensure Anaconda would be in a testable state for the Test Day.
-The Bugzappers group weekly meeting<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/Meetings</ref> was held on 2009-09-29. The full log is available<ref>http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2009-09-29/fedora-meeting.2009-09-29-15.25.log.html</ref>. [[User:Tk009|Edward Kirk]] reported that he had started work on moving action items from previous meetings into Trac<ref>http://fedorahosted.org/triage/</ref>, as had been discussed the previous week, and would continue to work on it. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] encouraged him to ask for help if he felt it was too much work to complete on his own.
-[[User:Tk009|Edward Kirk]] also provided a draft of the meeting organization SOP<ref>https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Tk009/meeting-sop</ref> that he had begun work on. The group felt it was a good start. Edward wondered where the page should end up, and [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] suggested it should be a page of its own, linked from the main Meetings page<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/Meetings</ref>, as other SOP pages are. Edward promised to work on finalizing the page for the next meeting.
+=== Release criteria updates ===
-[[User:Tk009|Edward Kirk]] said that he had emailed Brennan Ashton for an update on the triage metrics project, but had not received a reply. He said he was working on a plan to move the project forward given Brennan's erratic availability.
+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>.
-[[User:Tk009|Edward Kirk]] asked if it was yet time to implement the previously discussed change to triage policy, which was intended to begin when Fedora 13 became active. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] noted that branching had occurred on the development side, but Rawhide was still tracking Fedora 12 rather than Fedora 13, and the policy change should take effect when Rawhide began tracking Fedora 13.
+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:Tk009|Edward Kirk]] reminded the group that housekeeping tasks<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping</ref> for the Fedora 13 release would be due soon. He and [[User:poelstra|John Poelstra]] already had planned to divide the tasks up between themselves.
+[[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>.
-[[User:Rudchenkos|Sergey Rudchenko]] asked about what to do with Fedora 10 bugs as the end of support for Fedora 10 approached. [[User:Tk009|Edward Kirk]] and [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] suggested that he ask the reporters of Fedora 10 bugs to see if they could be reproduced on Fedora 11 or 12, and move the bugs to one of those releases if they could.
+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>.
-The next QA weekly meeting will be held on 2009-10-05 at 1600 UTC in #fedora-meeting, and the next Bugzappers weekly meeting on 2009-10-06 at 1500 UTC in #fedora-meeting.
+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/>
-=== Blocker bug criteria ===
+=== Update policy changes ===
-[[User:atorkhov|Alexey Torkhov]] asked<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-September/msg00650.html</ref> about the Wiki page on release criteria<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/ReleaseCriteria</ref>, asking 'If I've found a bug that (I think) breaks MUST rule should I add it to both F12Beta and F12Blocker trackers? And if it breaks SHOULD rule, it should be added only to F12Blocker tracker?' [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] replied<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-September/msg00671.html</ref> that Alexey's interpretation was correct as far as the criteria defined on that page went, but in practice bugs outside of those criteria were still considered Beta and final release blockers, as it was very hard comprehensively to codify all possible release criteria.
+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>.
-<references/>
-=== Beta test compose Delta ISOs ===
+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.
-Andre Robatino reported<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-September/msg00676.html</ref> that he had been unable to generate Delta ISOs from the Alpha release to the Beta test compose due to some technical problems.
+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.
 <references/>
-=== Xfce Test Day recap ===
+=== Update candidate notification ===
-[[User:Kevin|Kevin Fenzi]] provided a recap<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-September/msg00691.html</ref> of the previous week's Xfce Test Day<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2009-09-24_XFCE</ref>, thanking participants and providing a list of bugs which had been filed.
+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>.
 <references/>
-=== Wiki Test Results name space ===
+=== Proven tester meetings ===
-[[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] forwarded<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-September/msg00692.html</ref> a ticket<ref>http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1664</ref> about the creation of a Test_Results wiki namespace for the purpose of filing test results separately from Test Day events (the name space will allow people who have not signed the CLA to file results, as they currently are able to on Test Day pages). [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] replied<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-September/msg00693.html</ref> worrying about the implied suggestion that the Test_Day namespace be removed and all Test Day pages moved to the Test_Results namespace, which he thought would be a bad change. [[User:Johannbg|Jóhann Guðmundsson]] agreed<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-September/msg00705.html</ref>.
-<references/>
-=== Proposed removal of Anaconda from Test Day CDs ===
+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>.
-[[User:Kparal|Kamil Paral]] proposed<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-September/msg00708.html</ref> the removal of Anaconda from the standard build configuration for Test Day live images, on the basis that it is rarely used as part of Test Day testing and dependency problems with the anaconda package sometimes cause problems in the generation of the images. Several replies felt the change was unnecessary, and the availability of Anaconda on the Test Day CDs probably helped get more people testing Rawhide installation. In the end it was agreed that adding instructions for removing anaconda from the build to the Test Day live CD creation instructions page<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Test_Days/Live_Image</ref> would be sufficient to address the problem.
+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/>
-=== Installation testing results ===
+=== QA group representation at FUDCon Pune ===
-[[User:Liam|Liam Li]] provided a report<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-September/msg00721.html</ref> on testing conducted by his team of Red Hat testers on installation using the pre-Beta and Beta test compose images. He summarized the bugs they had encountered, and asked for help in completing the test cases listed on the test matrix<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_12_Beta_TC_Install</ref> which the team had not been able to cover.
+[[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/>

Search