QA/Meetings/20090603

= Attendees =


 * Adam Williamson (adamw)
 * Will Woods (wwoods)
 * Jóhann Guðmundsson (viking_ice)
 * John Poelstra (poelcat)
 * James Laska (jlaska)
 * Jesse Keating (f13)
 * Paul Frields (stickster)

= Agenda =

Previous meeting follow-up

 * 1) [adamw] - BugStatusWorkFlow - ask bugzilla guys to add a link from the bugzilla fields description page to the wiki page, for fedora
 * 2) * Completed (see ), waiting for bugzilla code update during next outage window for changes to go live
 * 3) [jlaska] - Send informal test day feedback survey to fedora-test-list and test day participants
 * 4) * Survey sent to participants and to fedora-test-list
 * 5) [wwoods] - create preupgrade test case and update test matrix template
 * 6) * Test cases created (see QA:Testcase_Preupgrade and QA:Testcase_Preupgrade_from_older_release) and added to QA:Fedora_11_Install_Results_Template for any future test matrices
 * 7) [jlaska] - create new RC1 test results page
 * 8) * Several pages created to track test results, including: QA:Fedora_11_RC0_Install_Test_Results, QA:Fedora_11_RC1_Install_Test_Results, QA:Fedora_11_RC2_Install_Test_Results, QA:Fedora_11_RC3_Install_Test_Results
 * 9) [adamw] - create common bug entry for
 * 10) * Done and could probably be removed now (see Common_F11_bugs) since newer kernel resolves the problem

F-11-GA Preparation

 * Blocker bugs (by component) - http://tinyurl.com/pqeq6n (currently 0 OPEN issues)
 * Schedule - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/11/Schedule
 * Installation test results - QA:Fedora_11_RC4_Install_Test_Results

Adamw noted that the new test results wiki page wasn't created yet. Jlaska indicated it would be created soon after the meeting, once he received notification that RC4 composition had completed.

f13 indicated that he will continue to upload more RC4 bits as they are created (live images remain).

jlaska provided an update on RC test results. The RC3 results are looking fairly good (when combined with RC0, RC1, RC2). Once initial scrubbing of RC4 media kits has completed, jlaska asked if attention could be made to verify the 9 MODIFIED bugs on the F11 blocker list.

As indicated in the Releases/11/Schedule, staging will begin Thu Jun 4.

jlaska asked if (anaconda-maint-list, NEW, x86_64 upgrade in KVM hangs (OOM) with 512MB RAM + encrypted root_) should be added to the common bugs page. Wwoods indicated that he would confirm on bare metal hardware first, and that this might be a candidate for common bugs. Further discussion began around whether Fedora has a minimal system requirements list. For additional comments, see open discussion below.

F-11 QA Post-mortem discussion
Jlaska indicated that a release-wide post-mortem review has been discussed for F11, and that he would like to begin the brainstorming around QA-specific topics. For example, what went well, and what needed improvement from a QA perspective.

jlaska had to step out, adamw lead the brainstorming.

Highlights (see IRC transcript for full details) ...

What worked well

 * 1) Fedora Test Days
 * 2) * 20 test events during F11
 * 3) * Formalized creation of live images for test days QA/Test_Days/Live_Image
 * 4) * Improve presentation and increased library of test cases
 * 5) Common_F11_bugs
 * 6) * More contributors and collaboration around existing wiki page
 * 7) * Consistent use of the common bug page as a resolution pathway for unresolved bugs and throughout mailing list communication
 * 8) Release Candidate testing
 * 9) * Increased QA community involvement in testing release candidates (see Category:Fedora_11_Test_Results)
 * 10) * Community driven Delta ISO generation

What needs improvement

 * 1) Blocker Bugs
 * 2) * Schedule & host earlier blocker bug list reviews
 * 3) * Improve messaging and guidelines around how to escalate a blocker bug for review
 * 4) * No workflow around verifying MODIFIED bugs
 * 5) * Large number ( of installation blocker bugs not reviewed prior to RC's
 * 6) Fedora Test Days
 * 7) * No test day for sound during F11
 * 8) * Complex or tightly coupled features need to be scheduled later in the cycle when things have stabalized
 * 9) * No capacity concept ... QA would be interested in defining # of events capable of hosting
 * 10) * Create a self-hosting test day procedure for non-QA hosted test events
 * 11) Release decisions
 * 12) * Clarify hand-off procedures between release engineering and quality assurance
 * 13) * Increase transparency around release slip meetings (or publicize minutes)
 * 14) Automation
 * 15) * No distro-wide automated testing ... daily manual installation and repo testing
 * 16) Metrics
 * 17) * No clear data for the health of the QA community, is it growing or shrinking?
 * 18) * Not clear how many testers contribute to each milestone (Alpha, Beta, Preview)

= Open discussion =

What are Fedora minimal requirements?
wwoods is seeing an OOM kill issue on a x86_64 KVM guest when upgrading from F10 -> F11 with only 512Mb of memory.

Everyone noted there isn't a clear definition of what minimal system requirements are for Fedora. Adamw directed folks to the bug he and Rahul filed.

= Upcoming QA meetings/events =


 * 2009-06-09 - BugZappers/Triage_days
 * 2009-06-10 16:00 UTC - Next QA Meeting QA/Meetings/20090610

= Action items =


 * [stickster] - who will be handling release_notes bugs to help with
 * [adamw] - propose draft wording of minimal requirements for the release_notes team to digest

= IRC Transcript =

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by [mailto:marius@pov.lt Marius Gedminas] - find it at mg.pov.lt!