Fedora 17 QA Retrospective

From FedoraProject

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Wishlist: adding note on blocker bug info system)
(Things that went well)
Line 29: Line 29:
 
{{Test_Results:Fedora_17_QA_Retrospective/good}}
 
{{Test_Results:Fedora_17_QA_Retrospective/good}}
 
* [[User:Adamwill|Adamwill]] - Pushing back the TC dates continued to help a lot with getting validation done on time
 
* [[User:Adamwill|Adamwill]] - Pushing back the TC dates continued to help a lot with getting validation done on time
 +
* [[User:Bruno|Bruno]] - The gcc 4.7 rebuild got done early enough, that we didn't have blocker issues caused by it
  
 
=== Could have been better ===
 
=== Could have been better ===

Revision as of 14:44, 7 April 2012

Contents

Introduction

This page is intended to gather feedback from the Fedora QA community on things that worked well and things that could have been better with the testing of Fedora 17. The feedback will be used as a basis for identifying areas for improvement for Fedora 17 testing. Any thoughts, big or small, are valuable. If someone already provided feedback similar to what you'd like to add, don't worry ... add your thoughts regardless.

For any questions or concerns, send mail to test@lists.fedoraproject.org.

Providing feedback

  • Gwjasu - I like ____ about the new ____ process

Adding feedback is fairly straight forward. If you already have a Fedora account ...

  1. Login to the wiki
  2. Select [Edit] for the appropriate section below.
  3. Add your feedback using the format:
    * ~~~ - I like ____ about the new ____ process
  4. When done, Submit your changes

Anonymous

If you do not have a Fedora account, follow the instructions below to submit anonymous feedback. Please note, mediawiki records the IP address associated with any anonymous page edits.

  1. Select the appropriate page for your feedback...
  2. Add your feedback using the format:
    * ~~~ - I like ____ about the new ____ process
  3. When done, Submit your changes

Feedback

Things that went well

Test Results:Fedora 17 QA Retrospective/good

  • Adamwill - Pushing back the TC dates continued to help a lot with getting validation done on time
  • Bruno - The gcc 4.7 rebuild got done early enough, that we didn't have blocker issues caused by it

Could have been better

Test Results:Fedora 17 QA Retrospective/bad

  • Adamwill - noloader landing between Beta TC1 and Beta TC2 was way too late and caused extensive havoc
  • Adamwill - maybe just because we have longer for TCs now, but RC period feels very short: RC1 date is a Thursday, Go/No-Go is the following Wednesday, that's 6 days but only 4 business days of validate / fix / respin
  • Adamwill - the ability to add stuff to comps during freezes finally bit us on the ass, as I knew it eventually would: Bugzilla: #807879. Adding gnome-boxes to comps during Beta freeze broke networking in KVMs
  • Adamwill - desktop team was sad that we couldn't co-ordinate Beta release with the GNOME 3.4 final release so 3.4 final made Beta

Wishlist

Test Results:Fedora 17 QA Retrospective/wishlist

  • tflink - it would be nice to have a better system for tracking current blockers. While the current wiki-based system is great, it's only updated once per hour and we don't always notice right away when the wiki updates start failing.

Recommendations

After enough time has been given for feedback, the QA team will discuss and make recommendations on changes to prioritize for Fedora 18. This section organizes and lists the recommendations.

In order to coordinate efforts, and measure effectiveness of recommendations, please record and track any action taken in the Fedora 18 roadmap in the QA TRAC instance.

References