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 ===
-There was no Test Day last week, and no Test Day is currently planned for this week. If you would like to propose a main track Test Day for the Fedora 13 cycle, please contact the QA team via email or IRC, or file a ticket in QA Trac<ref>http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/</ref>.
+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.
+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 ===
-As the QA beat was unfortunately not present for Fedora Weekly News #205, we will cover two weeks' worth of events below.
+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.
-A QA group weekly meeting<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings</ref> was held on 2009-11-30. No meeting was held on 2009-12-07 due to many group members being absent at FUDCon or elsewhere. The full log of the 2009-11-30 meeting is available<ref>http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2009-11-30/qa.2009-11-30-16.00.log.html</ref>. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] reported that he had started a development mailing list conversation regarding the proposed privilege escalation policy<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-November/msg01745.html</ref>.
+<references/>
-[[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] thanked the group for their feedback on [[User:poelstra|John Poelstra's]] plan to improve the release criteria<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-November/msg00926.html</ref>, and asked for comments on the planned next steps. John said he was planning to work in all the received feedback, send a revised draft of the page to the mailing list for comment, and do the final touches in a hackfest at the upcoming FUDCon. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] volunteered to write a proposed paragraph to cover subjective judgment of configuration-dependent problems.
-[[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] gave a more detailed update on the privilege escalation policy topic. He said the development mailing list discussion had generated some useful points and potential issues that should be dealt with by any policy, but no clear road forward. With some help from [[User:Kevin|Kevin Fenzi]], a plan was made for Adam to escalate the issue for consideration by FESco with reference to the previous discussion, and possibly a proposed policy created with the help of the security team.
-[[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] gave an update on the Fedora 12 QA retrospective. He thanked the group for their feedback, and outlined his plans. He intends to organize the feedback into topic groups to try and identify trends, and then discuss what can be improved for the Fedora 13 cycle based on that feedback.
-[[User:Wwoods|Will Woods]] and [[User:Kparal|Kamil Paral]] reported on the progress of the AutoQA project. Kamil had written some patches intended to make test development easier, providing --help and --dry-run parameters for each watcher. He now plans to document these improvements in the wiki once they are accepted. He had also worked on integrating rpmguard into AutoQA. Will had added --local and --dry-run parameters to the test harness so that tests can be run locally by developers. He had fixed various watchers to run tests only once when repositories are changed or builds are run, even if multiple architectures are changed. He was planning to write some notes on AutoQA for Fedora developrs for use at the upcoming FUDCon, and help Kamil with rpmguard integration. [[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] reported that packaging of the israwhidebroken code was now complete, with help from [[ToshioKuratomi|Toshio Kuratomi]].
-[[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] proposed that Glögg<ref>http://loupgaroublond.blogspot.com/2009/11/glogg.html</ref> be adopted as the official QA team drink. [[User:jkeating|Jesse Keating]] suggested magic hobo gravy<ref>http://hijinksensue.com/2009/11/27/the-special-sauce/</ref> as an alternative. No clear consensus was reached on the issue.
+=== Release criteria updates ===
-A Bugzappers group weekly meeting<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/Meetings</ref> was held on 2009-12-01. No meeting was held on 2009-12-08 due to many members being absent. The full log of the 2009-12-01 meeting is available<ref>http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2009-12-01/fedora-meeting.2009-12-01-15.06.log.html</ref>. [[User:Rjune|Richard June]] noted that updating the components and triagers page<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/Components_and_Triagers</ref> had been left with [[User:Tk009|Edward Kirk]], who was not present to report on it. [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] encouraged all group members to make sure they were listed on the page next to the correct components.
+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:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] started a discussion on the topic of anaconda triage. He explained that the anaconda team could benefit from having a triage volunteer, as [[User:andyl|Andy Lindeberg]] was no longer working on anaconda triage. This would take a significant amount of time and require knowledge of anaconda, but the anaconda team was prepared to help train volunteers. [[User:Rjune|Richard June]] volunteered to send a mail to the mailing list with details of the requirements, to ask for volunteers.
+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:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] took another look at the triage metrics situation. No-one had heard from Brennan Ashton lately, but Adam would try to check in with him at the upcoming FUDCon event. Adam also pointed out the fairly new statistics system within Bugzilla<ref>http://bugzilla.redhat.com/browse.cgi</ref> as a possibility for the group to explore.
+[[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:Mcepl|Matej Cepl]] reported that he had completed the agreed plan to add the Triaged keyword to all ASSIGNED bugs in Fedora 10 through 12.
+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 may be held on 2009-11-07 at 1600 UTC in #fedora-meeting, although several group members are at FUDCon during that time and may not be able to attend. The next Bugzappers weekly meeting will be held on 2009-12-08 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/>
-=== FUDCon Toronto ===
+=== Update policy changes ===
-The QA and BugZappers groups were both well represented at FUDCon Toronto<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FUDCon:Toronto_2009</ref>. [[User:Jlaska|James Laska]], [[User:Wwoods|Will Woods]], [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]], [[User:poelstra|John Poelstra]], [[User:StevenParrish|Steven M. Parrish]], [[User:Bashton|Brennan Ashton (comphappy)]] all attended, and a brand new BugZapper - Patrick Ian - was welcomed during the event. Steven, Will and Adam all gave talks: Steven<ref>http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fudcon-room-5/2009-12-05/fudcon-room-5.2009-12-05-17.11.log.html</ref> on effective bug reporting, Will<ref>http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fudcon-room-2/2009-12-05/fudcon-room-2.2009-12-05-21.12.log.html</ref> on AutoQA, and Adam<ref>http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fudcon-room-5/2009-12-05/fudcon-room-5.2009-12-05-19.09.log.html</ref> on getting involved with QA and BugZappers. Several group members also posted write-ups of the event: John<ref>http://poelcat.wordpress.com/2009/12/09/fudcon-toronto-trip-report/</ref>, Steven<ref>http://smparrish.livejournal.com/11639.html</ref>, and Adam<ref>http://www.happyassassin.net/2009/12/10/fudcon-toronto-2009-wrap-up/</ref>.
+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/>
-=== BugZappers triaged bugs policy change ===
+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:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]] announced<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-November/msg01228.html</ref> a small modification to the recently-implemented triaged bug policy change. To make searching easier, triagers should now add the Triaged keyword to all Fedora 11 and Fedora 12 bugs when they have been triaged, as well as marking them as ASSIGNED.
+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/>
-=== Release criteria revision ===
+=== Update candidate notification ===
-[[User:poelstra|John Poelstra]] posted a final request<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-December/msg00047.html</ref> for feedback on the proposed new release criteria<ref>https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria</ref>, noting that the pages would be finalized and made active at the upcoming FUDCon Toronto. At FUDCon, a group including John, [[User:Jlaska|James Laska]], [[User:Adamwill|Adam Williamson]], [[User:Notting|Bill Nottingham]] and [[User:tburke|Tim Burke]] revised the pages including all feedback provided from the list, and then made further revisions based on feedback by the anaconda and desktop teams. Adam announced the changes to the list<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-December/msg00137.html</ref>. Some further changes were then made based on suggestions from A. Mani<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-December/msg00140.html</ref> and others.
+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/>
-=== Bugzilla 3.4 public beta ===
+=== Proven tester meetings ===
-[[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] passed on an announcement<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-December/msg00099.html</ref> from Red Hat's Bugzilla team that a public beta of Bugzilla 3.4 for the Red Hat Bugzilla instance (which Fedora shares) is now available<ref>http://partner-bugzilla.redhat.com/</ref>. Later, James passed on the announcement for the second beta<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-December/msg00212.html</ref>.
-<references/>
-=== Fedora 13 schedule ===
+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:poelstra|John Poelstra]] provided<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-December/msg00101.html</ref> a draft schedule of QA tasks for the Fedora 13 release. He later provided an updated schedule<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-December/msg00176.html</ref> based on discussion at FUDCon Toronto. [[User:Jlaska|James Laska]] requested<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-December/msg00177.html</ref> an extra pre-alpha acceptance milestone on 2009-01-21.
+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/>
-=== Fedora 13 Alpha release notes ===
+=== QA group representation at FUDCon Pune ===
-[[User:Sundaram|Rahul Sundaram]] posted<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-December/msg00138.html</ref> a preliminary draft of the Fedora 13 Alpha release notes for comment and discussion.
+[[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