QA/Meetings/20090617

= Attendees =


 * Adam Williamson (adamw)
 * Will Woods (wwoods)
 * James Laska (jlaska)
 * Jesse Keating (f13)

Guest appearances by:
 * Mel Chua (mchua)
 * Kevin Fenzi (nirik)
 * Ricky Zhou (ricky)

= Agenda =

Previous meeting follow-up

 * 1) [stickster] - who will be handling release_notes bugs to help with
 * 2) [adamw] - propose draft wording of minimal requirements for the release_notes team to digest
 * 3) * i did the minimal requirements stuff on the bug (see )
 * 4) * Ball now in the fedora-release-notes court, but since Adamw is a docs team member now, he might help raise this issue through the docs channels

F-11 Retrospective feedback
John Poelstra hosted a F-11 Retrospective (aka post-mortem) yesterday (see meeting recap). The meeting was a cool mix of communication channels which included using gobby and a phone conference call. User:jlaska just wanted to briefly chat about experiences from that meeting, or the preparation done by the QA group leading up to the meeting.

User:jlaska gathered the QA talking points for the meeting ahead of time (see QA/Meetings/20090603). Did folks think that worked well, needed more/less prep from QA. Were your concerns appropriately raised?


 * adamw noted it felt like he came from the future, and that the format worked well
 * f13 indicated 2 positive notes:
 * many people recognized the efforts QA and bugzappers were putting into the release
 * many people recognized that more of that efforts and better tooling around those efforts will again have positive effect

jlaska asked if there was anything we'd want to change for next time ... in terms of recording pain points so we don't forget them?


 * f13 noted ... just like with the FAD, the proof will be in the pudding. If after a months time, nothing came of the talk, then I don't think it worked well. however if after a month's time, we have some progress on what people thing went poorly (or more effort in what people thing went well) then I think it'll have been a success.

jlaska took an action item to update the QA/Goals document to reflect renewed focus around FAD proposals and Fedora 11 retrospective feedback.

jlaska asked if the team felt we should be using gobby or phone for QA meetings? Consensus was that IRC was the most accessible method for hosting QA team meetings, and that gobby/phone would be better suited for more content driven collaborative meetings.

Nirik pointed to http://www.dissociatedpress.net/2009/06/03/pros-and-cons-of-irc-meetings/

QA Review of related FAD topics
Jlaska and wwoods were discussing the israwhidebroken.com proposal and wanted to raise awareness to folks who haven't yet provided feedback or reviewed the FAD proposals. f13 sent mail to the list with background details (see https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-June/msg00385.html). The propals are:


 * Milestone_Adjustment_Proposal
 * Israwhidebroken.com_Proposal
 * Koji_Build_Autosign_Proposal
 * Critical_Path_Packages_Proposal
 * No_Frozen_Rawhide_Proposal

If you haven't read the proposals and added your questions/concerns/ideas to the Discussion tab of each page. Please take a few minutes to do so. Several of these proposals have a larger impact to maintainers and consumers of rawhide.

AutoQA Update
Wwoods provided an update on the autoqa project (see http://autoqa.fedorahosted.org).

www.israwhidebroken.com (hereinafter irb.com) can be thought of as a simple proof-of-concept of an AutoQA system. the goals for irb.com are basically a simple set of tests running automatically in response to a trigger (new rawhide being built) with public results reported that's autoqa!

User:wwoods set irb.com as the first milestone for the autoqa project and filed a buncha tickets that outline the plan at https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/milestone/israwhidebroken.com. Will outlined a rough schedule for completing various tasks that lead up to the Fedora 12 Alpha release.

f13 gave an update on his work with Lucas Rodrigues (lmr) to help package autotest (the test scheduler the autoqa project intends to use). It's a difficult beast to package, and has a few unpackaged dependencies, including google web toolkit. Wwoods indicated he would continue with outlined tasks and adjust as needed should any issues surface from the packaging efforts.

Wwoods will lead efforts to create a rawhide acceptance test plan and test cases in time for next weeks meeting (June 24).

Open Discussion
Unfortunately, the meeting ran over and bumped into another time slot. The following items were planned for open discussion, but no time was available. These will be reviewed on the mailing list or planned for the next meeting.

Fedora 12 Schedule update
John Poelstra proposed:

There have been a few different conversations about adding more granularity to the schedule, more blocker bug days, and making the hand-off between releng and QA clearer. I've taken a shot at doing that here: http://poelstra.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-12/f-12-releng-tasks.html (right now releng is the most detailed and complete... I'll create other team schedules for QA, etc. after we get the kinks out of this one.)

Detailed discussion on the topic is available on the fedora-test-list at https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-June/msg00507.html

Mediawiki + Semantic update
Mel Chua and James Laska had a follow-on discussion to the Fedora 11 retrospective meeting discussing remaining plans for the mediawiki and semantic proof of concept. Mel was instrumental in designing the framework used by the laptop.org QA team. No updates as of yet, but Mel might be available to help setup a demo instance to gather feedback. Hopefully more information on this topic next week...

= Upcoming QA events =


 * 2009-06-23 - BugZappers/Triage_days
 * 2009-06-24 16:00 UTC - Next QA Meeting QA/Meetings/20090624

= Action items =


 * [jlaska] - update QA/Goals wiki document
 * [wwoods] - updates on Rawhide acceptance test plan

= IRC Transcript =

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