From Fedora Project Wiki

< QA

12:06 -!- bpepple []  has joined #fedora-testing
12:06 < Lovechild> wwoods: can you also a) set up a ical thing and b) warn us by mail at least a few days in advance?
12:06  * dmalcolm is in UTC-5
12:06 < n0dalus> but I realize I don't exactly represent a huge number of Fedora developers
12:06 < Lovechild> all hail Brian
12:06 <@wwoods> n0dalus: yeah, but we don't want to totally ignore you
12:06  * bpepple saw there was a QA meeting and figured I would drop by.
12:06 <@wwoods> Okay - next meeting will be at 0100UTC (8pm US Eastern)
12:07 <@wwoods> I'll try to set up a shared iCal
12:07 < n0dalus> you can do that kind of thing with Google Calendar I think
12:07 <@wwoods> and there will be mail to fedora-test-list at least.. 3 days in advance (Monday) - is that OK?
12:07 < Lovechild> going to bed at 2am on thursday.. ah what the hell, I have no life anyways
12:08 <@wwoods> okay! meeting officially starting... now
12:08 < Lovechild> wait.. I can't do math either.. UTC+1 plus a 60min meeting makes it 3am
12:08 <@wwoods> the agenda is at
12:08 <@wwoods> we're already on item 2 so let's keep going for a bit
12:09 < Lovechild> I would be pleased if we could alternate the meeting time at least once in a while..just in case we euro trash type people want to you know.. sleep and stuff
12:10 <@wwoods> heh! I understand... is there a good time that accomodates .eu and .au?
12:10 <@wwoods> I've been assuming most folks here are somewhere in the US, so I want one time that's good for .us and .eu, and one that's good for .us and .au
12:10 < Lovechild> I really don't think we can hit one golden time for all, if we aim at hitting the US once a month and EU once a month at least we give people the chance to partake
12:11 <@wwoods> if you all have to stay up late for me, I should at least be willing to do the same for you. heh.
12:12 < Lovechild> well.. I have no life anyways, I can be up most nights if need be
12:12 <@wwoods> so what's a good time for .eu? is this OK?
12:13 <@wwoods> I figured 1700 would make .eu and .us happy, and n0dalus voted for 0100 for .au/.us
12:13 < Lovechild> UTC 1600 would be decent, if not UTC 1900 or 2000
12:13 <@wwoods> oh yeah, 1600 would be better so we don't stomp FESCo
12:13 < Lovechild> otherwise you are hitting smack in dinner time for most of the EU
12:13 < bpepple> A different day of the week would word better for me, since I have FESCo on Thursday.
12:14 <@wwoods> friday or wednesday?
12:14 < bpepple> Either is fine by me.
12:14 < Lovechild> I would like wedensdays better, people tend to have plans for friday
12:14 <@wwoods> true
12:14 < EvilBob> thursday is the hardest day of the week for me
12:14 < bpepple> Lovechild: agreed.
12:14 < Lovechild> and I have a feeling of all crews, the QA team does not need to hold meetings on IRC drunk as all hell
12:15 <@wwoods> next meeting: 0100UTC, Wed. Dec. 20
12:15 < bpepple> wwoods: cool.
12:15 <@wwoods> after that: 1600UTC, Wed. Dec 27
12:15 < n0dalus> sounds good
12:15 < Lovechild> the plan is to meet once a week or there abouts?
12:15 <@wwoods> I may not be able to run the Dec. 20 meeting - I'm flying home that day
12:15 <@wwoods> Lovechild: yeah
12:15 < Lovechild> I can handle the dec 20 meeting if you want me to
12:16 <@wwoods> We've got 8 weeks 'til FC7t1
12:16 < n0dalus> that'll go fast I bet
12:16 <@wwoods> also, the more often the meetings are, the quicker they should be
12:16 <@wwoods> I hope.
12:16 <@wwoods> yeah, I figure we have about 6 weeks of planning / tool building
12:17 <@wwoods> and xmas/new years gobbles a week or two
12:17 <@wwoods> so, yeah.
12:18 <@wwoods> (where "xmas" is a non-denominational end-of-year holiday, ahem)
12:18 <@wwoods> anyway, reviewing stuff from last week
12:19 < Lovechild> I doubt we'll get much work commited from next meeting till after news years to be honest
12:19 <@wwoods> true, but that means we have a couple weeks for just planning stuff
12:19 <@wwoods> which is important
12:20 < bpepple> wwoods: agreed.
12:20 < Lovechild> agreed
12:20 <@wwoods> okay, reviewing from last week: I don't think there's much to talk about. poelcat was going to work on a flow diagram for the updates tool and such, but he's unfortunately leaving town to go to a funeral
12:20 <@wwoods> but we'll discuss how we think that stuff should work
12:21 <@wwoods> and he can make a nice diagram of it for next week
12:21 <@wwoods> (and maybe I'll convince him to run the meeting)
12:21 < Lovechild> sounds good
12:21 <@wwoods> okay, #3: FC6 common bugs
12:21 <@wwoods> I assume you've all seen
12:22 <@wwoods> 1) are there other commonly-reported bugs that should be on there?
12:22 <@wwoods> and 2) what can we do to prevent them from recurring?
12:22 < Lovechild> should the dreaded yum update causes X to quit bug not be on that list or is that a non-issue now?
12:22 < n0dalus> a couple of those bugs were hit early in the testing, I'm not sure why they weren't fixed?
12:23 <@wwoods> Lovechild: oh, I think that's still happening
12:23 < EvilBob> it is still happening
12:23 <@wwoods> Lovechild: do you know of a bug # and/or workaround/fix for that?
12:23 < dmalcolm> Lovechild: some of the desktop guys figured out what was happening
12:23 < Lovechild> just a sec
12:23 <@wwoods> is it a -testing package, or a live one?
12:23  * dmalcolm looks up the bug
12:23 < n0dalus> yeah I hit that yum/X thing a week ago or so
12:23 < dmalcolm> ?
12:24 <@wwoods> dmalcolm: cool. wow, that last comment was 25 minutes ago
12:24 <@wwoods> heh
12:24 < Lovechild> yep that is the one.. damn you beagle for being slower than dmalcolm
12:25  * dmalcolm has been installing/upgrading/watching things go boom, and gathering info on a clone of that bug
12:25 < Lovechild> I'll be back in 5 mins, I have to feed people
12:25 <@wwoods> dmalcolm: if Ray confirms that this fixes the bug, I guess we don't need to add it
12:25 < dmalcolm> halfline + soeren + ajax figured it out using systemtap, IIRC
12:26 <@wwoods> is anyone already on the cc list for that bug?
12:27 < Lovechild> back
12:27  * dmalcolm adds himself
12:27 <@wwoods> I'd like someone to watch it for changes and update the FC6Common bug if it turns out that it will remain in FC6
12:27 <@wwoods> if it's going to magically go away, let us know (on fedora-test-list or something)
12:28 < bpepple> wwoods: I'll watch it.
12:28 <@wwoods> bpepple: awesome, many thanks
12:28 < dmalcolm> (hopefully patching DBus will fix it)
12:28 <@wwoods> There's also a yum-segfault bug that I've seen a bajillion dupes against
12:29 <@wwoods> but I can't remember the bug number offhand
12:29 <@wwoods> I'll own that one
12:29 < Lovechild>
12:30 < Lovechild> ?
12:30 <@wwoods> Lovechild: yes! good catch
12:30  * Lovechild hugs bugzilla search
12:31 <@wwoods> I'll add it to the FC6Common page after I get some info from jeremy about the ETA on a fix or workaround
12:31 <@wwoods> as for preventing these from recurring.. Ideally we'd just write RHTS tests that trigger the bug
12:31 <@wwoods> e.g. install the bad package, check to see if X restarted
12:32 <@wwoods> the yum segfault is trickier
12:32 < n0dalus> we could make some sort of stress testing tool for yum
12:32 < Lovechild> a crashme type thing?
12:32 <@wwoods> n0dalus: hmm! that would be an excellent test for yum
12:33 <@wwoods> yum is one of the most important parts of any release - pretty much anything else that's broken can be fixed if yum works
12:33 < n0dalus> yeah
12:34 < Lovechild> it's also sadly one of the hardest bits to stress test automatically, it tends to go boom mostly when the package is bad which is not really wrong.
12:34 <@wwoods> is there anything like this already? does anyone want to volunteer to hack at it (or ask skvidal about how to do it)?
12:35 < dmalcolm> I started hacking on one, but am totally doomed timewise
12:35  * dmalcolm finds a link to the source code
12:35 < n0dalus> it should probably use the cli interface and not any bindings, since the bindings might hide bugs in the cli stuff
12:35 <@wwoods> n0dalus: right
12:35 <@wwoods> so probably we want to set up a fake local yum repo and try installing a gazillion packages in weird ways
12:36 <@wwoods> or something
12:36 <@wwoods> using.. a shell script that calls yum -y? was that what you were thinking, n0dalus?
12:36 < dmalcolm> n0dalus, wwoods:
12:36 < n0dalus> wwoods: something like that
12:36 < dmalcolm>
12:37 < dmalcolm> I got as far as code that generates packages and yum repos (from scratch) with known properties
12:37 < dmalcolm> e.g. def make_local_repo_depchain_test(chainLength, isTerminated, addUnrequired):
12:37 < dmalcolm>     """
12:37 < dmalcolm>     Generate a yum repo consisting of:
12:37 < dmalcolm>        test-package-base which has a requirement on test-requirement-chain-001,
12:37 < dmalcolm>        which starts a chain up to test-requirement-chain-<count>
12:37 < dmalcolm>        plus test-unrequired-package outside the chain
12:37 < dmalcolm>     """
12:37 < dmalcolm> which works
12:38 <@wwoods> cool! anyone wanna take this and run with it?
12:38 < dmalcolm> but never got it to actually run yum upon these test repos
12:39 < dmalcolm> I can help anyone who wants to pick up this code and run with it, but I haven't the time to hack on it myself ATM
12:39 <@wwoods> I can try to poke at it in my Copious Spare Time (cough)
12:39 < Lovechild> maybe we could advertise for some help here?
12:39 <@wwoods> I'll see if skvidal has any suggestions, too
12:40 <@wwoods> yeah, I think this is something we could bring up with -devel and on -test-list and see if anyone can help
12:40 < dmalcolm> please CC me when you do, I'm hopelessly behnd on those lists
12:40 <@wwoods> sure, I'll do that
12:41 <@wwoods> okay, moving on (so we don't run really long)
12:41 < n0dalus> would we generate a set of mostly empty rpms with semi-complex dependencies, or would it be easier to just randomly remove and add non-vital rpms from the fedora packages on a running system
12:42 <@wwoods> n0dalus: Eventually, both, but whichever is easier should be first
12:42 <@wwoods> sounds like dmalcolm was working towards the first approach
12:42 <@wwoods> so that might be the easier one
12:42 < n0dalus> ok
12:42 < dmalcolm> yes, my approach as the first of n0dalus' suggestions
12:42 <@wwoods> Anyway, so, I mentioned the proposed F*7 schedule earlier
12:43 < dmalcolm> I wrote the rpmfluff makes it easy to create small broken RPMs
12:43 <@wwoods> it was outlined by Max here:
12:43 < dmalcolm> s/rpmfluff/rpmfluff tool, which/
12:43 < Lovechild> how does that schedule stack up against major projects like GNOME?
12:44 <@wwoods> The subsequent discussion ( is a really good link) outlined the need for better release criteria
12:44 < dmalcolm> re the schedule: I weighed in on that thread already, but here goes: where in the schedule (if anywhere) do we try to define what high-level goals we have for it?
12:44 <@wwoods> Lovechild: I'm not sure, actually. I think that, normally, we try to align with GNOME releases pretty closely
12:44 <@wwoods> dmalcolm: yeah, that's a big question-mark right now
12:45 < Lovechild> wwoods:  March 14th GNOME 2.18.0 Final Release!
12:45 <@wwoods> at some point, there needs to be a meeting to decide what features are going into F*7, and what priority each feature has
12:45 < Lovechild> I would really like to have test3 include the final 2.18.0 release, that will encourage people to jump on test3 and help us out
12:46 < Lovechild> and the current plan allows for that, test3 is set for MArch 27 which means freeze if on the 20th.. plenty of time to get the packages in
12:46 <@wwoods> Lovechild: I'd like that too - we should definitely bring that up when planning happens
12:46 <@wwoods> I think they've accounted for that already but I'd like that to be made explicit
12:46 <@wwoods> normally they'll say so when they put out the final schedule
12:47 < Lovechild> I brought it up to Jesse Keating last time around and he tended to agree
12:47 <@wwoods> right, and that's what we did with FC6 (if memory serves)
12:47 <@wwoods> we used the late beta packages until we had the final ones
12:47 < Lovechild> onlyu because of slips
12:47 < Lovechild> you should do so intentionally this time
12:48 < EvilBob> I would just like a fedora release where "hey everything works" is the big hype item not the inclusion of some half working 'new tech'
12:48 <@wwoods> I think the GNOME releases are usually stable enough that we can have it be a required feature for F*7
12:48 <@wwoods> EvilBob: yeah, totally. This is why I want to have a feature planning meeting
12:48 <@wwoods> where we decide which features we can just drop if they don't work by test3
12:49 < Lovechild> might I make a radical suggestion, some time ago I was talking to Jesse about getting good bug reports. It turns out that we don't even enable the debuginfo repos for development series.. I think we should take it a st
ep further, hack bug-buddy to point at our bugzilla and install debuginfo packages by default for development
12:49 <@wwoods> and which ones are drop-dead absolutely necessary (or very, very likely to work just fine) and we can slip the release until they work
12:49 <@wwoods> Lovechild: GNOME has told us that they don't want us to hack bug-buddy like that
12:49 <@wwoods> they want the reports to go to them
12:49 <@wwoods> I agree about installing debuginfo by default in devel
12:49 < n0dalus> Lovechild: I don't know what kind of net connection you have, but I find it hard enough to download all the updates and test releases as it is
12:50 < Lovechild> I have 4Mbit.. besides, it's part of the price you pay for running devel.
12:50 <@wwoods> but I think we might need a fedora-specific bug tool (or plugins/modifications to bug-buddy)
12:50 <@wwoods> so when something crashes you can click the "download debuginfo and restart" button
12:50 <@wwoods> and then you can attempt to reproduce the problem
12:50 <@wwoods> and then it will send reports to GNOME *and* Fedora
12:50 < Lovechild> the problem is recreating a crash in most cases
12:51 < dmalcolm> you don't need to reproduce: detach gdb, download debuginfo, then reattach
12:51 < n0dalus> you shouldn't need to restart after getting debuginfo
12:51 < dmalcolm> heh
12:51 < n0dalus> :)
12:51 <@wwoods> dmalcolm: oh, so it can be a "download debuginfo and get backtrace" button?
12:51 < Lovechild> at the very least if it's hard to time but happens often if we have debug symbols by default, then we get a decent backtrace
12:51 < dmalcolm> wwoods: I believe it's implementable, yes
12:51 <@wwoods> that's excellent. and that's a really good case for a fedora-specific bug tool
12:52 < dmalcolm> and you could parse the backtrace, figure out what binaries are involved, and then figure out which debuginfo RPMs are needed
12:52 < n0dalus> is bug buddy enabled in standard Fedora releases?
12:52 <@wwoods> does bug-buddy have any kind of plugin arch or would we need to add that (or roll our own tool)?
12:52 < Lovechild> I can live with that, I just worry about the amount of un-debugable reports any project gets
12:52 < Lovechild> n0dalus: no.. but it should be
12:52 < Lovechild> wwoods: I don't think it does, but we might be able to poke the maintainer in a polite manner
12:52 <@wwoods> It would be really cool to work with them to add something like that
12:53 < dmalcolm> I think that the way to do this is to implement it in a modular way, so it can be of use to every distribution, with a Fedora-specific backend
12:53 <@wwoods> dmalcolm, Lovechild: agreed
12:53 < dmalcolm> that way, upstream bugbuggy is more likely to buy-in
12:53 < dmalcolm> s/bugbuggybugbuddy/
12:53 <@wwoods> does anyone know the upstream maintainer?
12:54 < Lovechild> only by name, but he seems like a nice fella.. I'm no big coder though so I couldn't hack up a prototype to show off
12:55 < n0dalus> Fernando Herrera  <>
12:55 < n0dalus> according to the changelog
12:55 < Lovechild> yep
12:55 <@wwoods> Well, I'll see if I can talk to him about the idea - could be something other folks have requested already
12:56 <@wwoods> maybe he's already started work on it. who knows.
12:56 < n0dalus> hmm time is almost over isn't it?
12:56 <@wwoods> yeah, close to it
12:56 -!- mspevack is now known as mspevack_out
12:56 < Lovechild> bug buddy is getting a lot of attention lately, we can even attach scripts to fetch extra information and stuff now
12:56 < Lovechild> so it wouldn't surprise me if we could convince him to help out
12:56 <@wwoods> Lovechild: awesome, sounds really good
12:57 < dmalcolm> (big privacy debate, and what happens in the script crashes)
12:57 < dmalcolm> s/in/if/
12:57 < n0dalus> if we can attach scripts even that would be enough, but it would be nice of course to have an interface more suited to what we want
12:58 < Lovechild> I'm mostly worries about what happens if someone edits the script to like rm -rf ~
12:58 <@wwoods> As for the features / release criteria stuff, I'll mail f-a-b and emphasize that we want to see a feature-planning meeting
12:58 < n0dalus> couldn't stick a rm -rf ~ into any script though?
12:58 < Lovechild> well what do I know.. I'm a retard
12:59 <@wwoods> the script should be root-owned, so nobody should be messing with it except the bug-buddy-fedora maintainer
12:59 < dmalcolm> it could also run inside its own SELinux domain, for that matter
12:59 <@wwoods> dmalcolm: indeed
12:59 < dmalcolm> so that it can only ever read data, never modify anything
13:00 < Lovechild> sounds like a perfect solution..
13:00 < Lovechild> so who wants to bother poor fer?
13:00 < dmalcolm> (there are privacy issues as well)
13:00 <@wwoods> a quick poll: do we need more categories for features (beyond "must-have, will slip release dates for" and "non-essential, will be dropped if broken")?
13:00 < Lovechild> dmalcolm: no more than we have on regular backtraces in terms of picking up urls, passwords, usernames..
13:01 < n0dalus> there are potential privacy issues with anything like that though -- even backtraces can be parsed for things like IP addresses and possibly other things
13:01 <@wwoods> I guess maybe that depends on the definition of "broken", doesn't it?
13:01 <@wwoods> there's some things we can include as-is, even if it's not working right, and fix with an update after release
13:01 < Lovechild> wwoods: by any standard of broken Evolution is a showstopper there
13:01 < dmalcolm> Lovechild: yeah - I believe bug-buddy already tries to clean things up:
13:02 <@wwoods> Lovechild: hah! Yeah, I dunno, it hasn't crashed for me, personally, in weeks
13:02 < Lovechild> dmalcolm: you are right I just tried the version in Development and it does ask me to review for personal information
13:02 <@wwoods> but you make a good point
13:02  * dmalcolm hears "evolution" and runs and hides
13:03 < Lovechild> wwoods: we need to define broken a bit better and also a set of core packages where core functionality must exist (like Evolution which on FC6 doesn't send mail on many setup currently)
13:03  * bpepple actually had many problems with Evolution, though he seems to be in the minority.
13:03 < EvilBob> Evolution Un-Broken? Never!
13:03 <@wwoods> how do we decide between "buggy but still good enough to stay in the distro" and "so horribly broken that it must be removed until it works"
13:03 < n0dalus> wwoods: things like evolution are used by too many people to remove
13:03 <@wwoods> Lovechild: was my attempt to define Core Functionality
13:04 < EvilBob> bpepple: one rule here when it comes to Evilution as we call it NEVER again
13:04 <@wwoods> but yeah, I agree with n0dalus - it should include core apps like Firefox and Evolution
13:04 <@wwoods> things we depend on and cannot ship without
13:04 < Lovechild> I would like to include something relating to the primary purpose of an app being functional.. such as "Evolution sends/recieves mail without blowing up"
13:05 < Lovechild> not just starting up.. starting up is a bad test
13:05 <@wwoods> Lovechild: right, but it's a very basic smoke test (and easily tested)
13:05 <@wwoods> I didn't have time during the FC6 test cycle to write up a list of core apps and short functional test plans for each one
13:05 < Lovechild> yet it did slip for Evolution the last time
13:06 < EvilBob> Heck having Evolution actually delete mail from an imap server would have been nice not that long ago
13:06 < Lovechild> I can help with that test matrix for FC7
13:06 <@wwoods> Did it? I don't remember slipping for Evolution itself
13:06 <@wwoods> Lovechild: did you see the test template I wrote? (
13:06 < Lovechild> wwoods:
13:06 <@wwoods> I was thinking we could use that to write functional tests for packages
13:06 -!- rdieter []  has left #fedora-testing ["Konversation terminated!"] 
13:07 < Lovechild> also how would people feel about the concept of Fedora Love days, get users together once every 2 weeks or so to clean up bugzilla, confirm bugs
13:08 < n0dalus> is a good idea I think
13:08 < Lovechild> I would be happy to cheerlead the effort and give my time
13:08 <@wwoods> The basic idea is that we write a really simple document - it will be all stuff that seems obvious - to test something like Firefox (Start browser. Load etc)
13:08 <@wwoods> so later we can automate that process
13:08 < n0dalus> it'd be nice if we could give some sort of recognition to people who help out with things like that
13:08 < bpepple> wwoods: +1
13:08 <@wwoods> Lovechild: excellent! we try to do those on fridays
13:08 <@wwoods> historically the BugZappers stuff does that every Friday in #fedora-triage, but that's kind of half-dead
13:09 <@wwoods> we could just have people come here for that sort of thing (or #fedora-qa, if I can ever get the channel from mharris)
13:09 < Lovechild> okay, I feel rather useless so I'll stick my head on the block and try to rally people for that
13:09 <@wwoods> Lovechild: but anyway, yes, it's a fantastic idea and I love it to bits
13:09 <@wwoods> heh
13:09 <@wwoods> we were talking before about having a "Bugzilla RPG"
13:09 < n0dalus> lol
13:10 <@wwoods> like GNOME has, where you get points for closing dupes and triaging bugs and such
13:10 <@wwoods> also points for writing HowToTest docs and things
13:10 < Lovechild> well not being a great coder or anything.. I can only help out that way, but I do have the advantage of having all the time in the world
13:10 < Lovechild> kinda like Launchpad' Karma concept..
13:11 <@wwoods> It doesn't take mad hax0r skillz to write test docs, mostly just time and patience to write down, you know, "how to make sure that firefox is working right"
13:11 <@wwoods> oh they have something like this too? Interesting
13:11 <@wwoods> what does Karma get you?
13:11 <@wwoods> other than.. yknow.. Karma
13:11  * Lovechild hates firefox with the fury of a million suns
13:12 < Lovechild> it's basically just an ego thing I guess.. it gives you status amongst the Launchpad users, nothing more.
13:12 <@wwoods> aha
13:12 <@wwoods> then yes, exactly like that
13:12 < n0dalus> maybe we can put the top names in a prominent place?
13:12 < Lovechild> but one would be surprised what people will do for an ego boost..
13:12 <@wwoods> although I personally want to send out stuff to people with high karma now and then
13:12 <@wwoods> n0dalus: oh absolutely
13:12 < n0dalus> or add them to a file in /usr/share/doc/fedora-...
13:13 < n0dalus> big thanks file or something
13:13 <@wwoods> a big ol' leader-board, each user gets a page that shows their karma, any trophies they may have received
13:13 <@wwoods> n0dalus: ooh! that's another good idea
13:13 < n0dalus> I personally would find it cool to have my name somewhere on the filesystem
13:13 <@wwoods> definitely
13:13 < Lovechild> add the top 10 to the "about Fedora" thing, the Fedora project would like to thank the following community heroes for helping us bring you F7?
13:14 <@wwoods> Lovechild: I can't promise that - the developers and extras packagers and so on would all want in - but something like it would be completely awesome
13:14 <@wwoods> but maybe the devs and packers and stuff can run their own karma system. or ours can be Fedora-wide!
13:14 < Lovechild> well I'd be happy if we got a link to the status page from there or something
13:15 <@wwoods> except then things get dicey. how do you decide whether making a new package is more valuable than fixing three bugs?
13:15 <@wwoods> I definitely want to have some accolades for the QA Team though
13:15 <@wwoods> a link from About Fedora would probably be fine
13:16 < Lovechild> sometimes closing 3 bugs is worthless dup removal whereas a new package is always good
13:16 -!- craigt []  has joined #fedora-testing
13:16 < Lovechild> other times 3 bugs can be incredibly hard work.. you're right hard job to determine
13:16 <@wwoods> Lovechild: right, but sometimes closing 3 bugs involves weeks of intense debugging, and a new package just involves modifying a pre-existing spec
13:16 < Lovechild> however if we add points for comments to those bugs, that would tend to even out the score right
13:16 <@wwoods> it's really hard to compare the two, so I'd prefer not to cause wars between devel/extras/QA about who's more important
13:17 <@wwoods> although maybe that's what people want
13:17 <@wwoods> competition! whee!
13:17 < Lovechild> if you helped debug a problem, then you are likely to have lots of comments on the relevant bugs
13:17 < n0dalus> and larger comments too
13:17 <@wwoods> yeah, commenting on a bug should get you some small amount of karma/XP/points, but it need to be diminishing - can't have people gaming the system
13:17 < Lovechild> say if you set the provides information bit you get 5 points
13:17 < n0dalus> attachments
13:18 < Lovechild> but lets not spend to much time on that, it's just fun and games - the object is to make Fedora better
13:18 < n0dalus> wwoods: I think it would be fairly obvious if someone was trying to submit lots of junk changes. What do we do with people that do that already? (does anyone ever do that)
13:18 < Lovechild> we only have 8 weeks till test1, we should spend them wisely
13:19 <@wwoods> n0dalus: nobody does that, because there's very little incentive to make/change bug reports at all
13:19 <@wwoods> other than the hope of getting a bug fixed
13:19 <@wwoods> and a desire to make fedora more awesome
13:20 < Lovechild> on sidenote I'll reward whom ever allows me to stab those blog comment spammers in the face via the internet
13:21 <@wwoods> I've been working getting facepunchd into Fedora
13:21 <@wwoods> very little traction so far :/
13:22 <@wwoods> it seems people don't *want* to be punched in the face, *especially* when they need it
13:22 < n0dalus> there's probably worse things in Fedora already
13:22 < EvilBob> bugzilla is the least fun internet game ever
13:22 <@wwoods> yeah, I'd like bugzilla to be a little more like kingdom of loathing
13:23 <@wwoods> or something
13:23 < EvilBob> as a user it sucks because many times you file a bug and never know if anyone even looked at the dang thing
13:23 <@wwoods> EvilBob: yeah! it's terribly frustrating
13:23 < Lovechild> like callion when you file bugs on his extras packages..
13:24 <@wwoods> but if there was more of us going through bugzilla and trying to respond to bugs
13:24 <@wwoods> and pinging developers about easy-fix bugs
13:24 <@wwoods> and such
13:24 <@wwoods> it would suck less.
13:24 < n0dalus> the less bugs there are open the faster everything will work
13:24 <@wwoods> and if doing that was kinda fun, or had some kind of social aspect attached, maybe we'd have more people
13:24 < Lovechild> I hope we can get the Love days up and running, that would help greatly on that
13:24 <@wwoods> so, yeah
13:24 <@wwoods> Lovechild: definitely
13:25 <@wwoods> should we have them here, or keep the traditional #fedora-triage location?
13:25 < Lovechild> I'd like it to be here.. this is -testing after all
13:25 < n0dalus> I know people were looking a while ago into adding more features to redhat bugzilla? like the ones on gnome's for example
13:25 <@wwoods> fair enough
13:25 <@wwoods> n0dalus: yeah, the bugzilla maintainer for redhat sits in the next cube over
13:26 <@wwoods> but I haven't bothered him about this stuff yet
13:26 <@wwoods> mostly I want to pull info out of bugzilla and have the Bugzilla RPG live somewhere outside bugzilla
13:26 <@wwoods> so that it can pull data from many sources (the wiki, test tools, etc)
13:26 < n0dalus> interesting
13:26 < Lovechild> It would be cool to find some kind of silly prize for the "bugzilla cowboy of the week"
13:26 <@wwoods> Lovechild: not a bad idea!
13:27 <@wwoods> speeking of bugs-of-the-week:
13:27 < n0dalus> does red hat have some cheap hats or t-shirts or something they can send out to 10 people a year or something?
13:27 <@wwoods> n0dalus: oh definitely
13:27 <@wwoods> all sorts of funky stuff
13:28 <@wwoods> and, of course, free FC media and such
13:28 <@wwoods>
13:28 <@wwoods> but I wish we had more fedora-specific stuff
13:28 < Lovechild> is there an easy way to create a list of bugs filed against "release" in the past week - it would be helpful for the love days, limiting the amount of reports and all
13:28 < n0dalus> wwoods: that FC6-thisweek link only works for your account I think
13:28 <@wwoods> oh wait, I made it public
13:29 <@wwoods>
13:29 <@wwoods>
13:29 <@wwoods> the second link is for FC5
13:29 < EvilBob> I was shocked at the quality of the shirts and hats from BrandFuel
13:29 <@wwoods> I have to keep reminding myself that we still support that
13:29 < EvilBob> The quality was a lot better than I actually expected
13:30 < n0dalus> speaking of handy bug links, I have some Firefox quick url things you can import from
13:30 <@wwoods> oh nice!
13:31 < EvilBob> Cool
13:31 < n0dalus> I use them all the time
13:31 <@wwoods> does anyone want to be Head Cheerleader for the bugzapper / Fedora Love day stuff? Lovechild?
13:32 <@wwoods> (we're over 90 minutes now, so we should start cleaning up)
13:32 < Lovechild> wwoods: I'll be sure to wear my pom-poms and look really stupid
13:32 <@wwoods> haha
13:32 <@wwoods> hooray!
13:33 <@wwoods> I'm in here from 10-6 EST on Friday (I guess that's.. 1500-2100UTC), so it would be good to have folks in other time zones who will be around for different parts of the day
13:34 <@wwoods> oh, you guys know about #fedorabot right?
13:34 < Lovechild> I figure Fri 5th of January might be a good day to start things off, no holidays to mess it up and people should be sober.. plus it gives me time to set things up and send out mails
13:34 <@wwoods> Lovechild: sounds excellent
13:34 < Lovechild> fedorabot.. do not ring a bell
13:35 <@wwoods> there's a bot in #fedorabot that sends a message whenever someone creates a new bug / closes a bug / etc.
13:35 <@wwoods> it's really good for monitoring current bugzilla goings-on
13:35 < Lovechild> cool..
13:35 < n0dalus> it's in my auto-join thing
13:35 < BobJensen-Away> #FedoraBot :You can't join that many channels
13:35 < BobJensen-Away> Oh well
13:35 <@wwoods> BobJensen-Away: haha no way! bummer
13:35 <@wwoods> you have officially spread yourself too thin!
13:35 < BobJensen-Away> lol
13:36 <@wwoods> so yeah, testing-type folks will always be in here, but every couple of fridays we will have official Love Days for cleaning up bugzilla
13:36 <@wwoods> or for working on bugs of a specific type/component
13:37 < Lovechild> BobJensen-Away: it's IRCs way to telling you to slow down.. like having a heart attack
13:37 < BobJensen-Away> Lovechild: too many points of interest I guess
13:38 <@wwoods> Lovechild: I'll let you decide when, send out announcements, decide on themes (if you want to have one), etc.
13:38 <@wwoods> Should we have people in #fedora who should be submitting bugs come here for help?
13:38 < Lovechild> wwoods: will do
13:39 <@wwoods> Lovechild: awesome, many thanks
13:39 < Lovechild> well, the more helping hands we can get really
13:39 <@wwoods> oh absolutely
13:39 <@wwoods> I'll be there whenever
13:39 < BobJensen-Away> training users how to file good bugs IMO is important
13:39 <@wwoods> just say the word
13:39 < n0dalus> been nice talking with everyone, but I should probably be going now (5am)
13:39 <@wwoods> n0dalus: yeah no doubt! get some sleep!
13:40 < Lovechild> also I can't stay awake for 24hours, so I'll try to find someone to eventually take the other two - three shifts so there will always be someone to help out newcomers
13:40 <@wwoods> We should probably call this meeting over. We didn't get to discuss QA workflows or QA tools but we can do that next week (when poelstra is around)
13:40 <@wwoods> Lovechild: definitely
13:41 < Lovechild> okay.. thank you all for the great time.. it's time for me to stuff my face with food
13:41 <@wwoods> same here
13:41 < n0dalus> I won't be able to come next time, but hope you guys have a productive discussion
13:41 <@wwoods> yeah, I may or may not be here
13:41 <@wwoods> but I trust poelstra to come up with sane decisions on how the tools should work
13:41 < Lovechild> I'll stay up just to be here.. even if it means playing n0dalus and staying up till 5am
13:42 <@wwoods> dmalcolm too - they're at Red Hat and have been an incredibly important part of building the mighty test infrastructure we have
13:43 <@wwoods> I'm really excited about getting them and the stuff to be an official part of the Fedora QA process
13:43 <@wwoods> better tools = less work, better Fedora, more fun
13:44 <@wwoods> anyway! I will post the logs ASAP, and some condensed meeting notes later today
13:44 <@wwoods> thanks for staying up so late to talk, guys!
13:44 < n0dalus> no worries