From Fedora Project Wiki

< QA‎ | Meetings


People present (lines said):

  • jlaska (174)
  • kparal (39)
  • maxamillion (28)
  • adamw (23)
  • jskladan (19)
  • wwoods (16)
  • fenris02 (8)
  • zodbot (4)
  • Oxf13 (3)
  • _lmr_ (2)



Previous meeting follow-up

Fedora 13 RC test status

Upcoming test milestones:

  • 2010-04-16 - Final Blocker Meeting (f13blocker) #1 (recap)
  • 2010-04-16 - Pre-RC Branched Acceptance Test Plan
  • 2010-04-23 - Final Blocker Meeting (f13blocker) #2
  • 2010-04-29 - Test 'Final' Test Compose
  • 2010-04-30 - Final Blocker Meeting (f13blocker) #3
  • 2010-05-05 - Final Blocker Meeting (f13blocker) #4
  • 2010-05-06 - Test 'Final' RC

Upcoming test days:

Fedora 13 QA Retrospective
Ideas have already been coming in since F-13-Alpha. It's not too early to note QA issues you felt where handled well, or could have been improved. Your ideas will be used during F-14 QA goal planning. Voice your comments at Fedora_13_QA_Retrospective.


  • fenris02 - asked how to update configs to use F-13-Beta. Jlaska noted that the configs appeared updated in (infrastructure.git), but promised to follow-up with fenris02' after the meeting

Bodhi QA workflow status check-in

  • adamw asked lmacken and mathieu for a heads up as to when the improved feedback system will be available. Adamw noted that mathieu is working on it in the 'tg2 branch' (turbogears 2). Jlaska asked if there were requirements for bodhi-2 posted, adamw indicated that his earlier email, and dledford's, were being used as the initial requirements.

Proventesters check-in

  • Adam Miller asked whether a vote was needed to move things forward. Adam Williamson offered sending a final draft mail to the list, noting the policy would go into effect if no serious objections surface.
  • After the final draft, jlaska asked what steps should follow. The group came up with:

Package Acceptance Test Plan check-in

  • Kamil Paral discussed the current state of the [1]. Kamil noted that we can have the test plan completed before F-13 is released, but work to automate the test plan won't be completed and will be tracked separately as a combination of AutoQA milestones (Package Sanity Test, Resultsdb, depcheck).
  • Kamil plans to send a final draft to the list for review. AdamW pointed out he was pretty please with the state of the test plan.

AutoQA check-in

There has been a lot of AutoQA activities in recent weeks, Jlaska asked the group to walk through some highlights.

Josef Skladanka updated the group on several AutoQA activities:

  1. Getting URLs of test results from AutoQA testruns is nearly finished. Patches out for review on
  2. The beakerlib-based initscript test is now in production (see sample results)
  3. Making progress on the resultsDB - We have finished the db schema (see AutoQA_resultsdb_schema) and accepted a input API (see AutoQA_resultsdb_API)
  4. Next steps ...
    • Prototyping the resultsdb and using an XMLRPC based API to populate with results (jlaska, 16:06:12)
    • Creating a front-end which will be used for review/publish the data

Kamil Páral updated the group on his AutoQA focus areas:

  1. In addition to the notes above from Josef, working with Petr Splichal to automate the QA:Package_Sanity_Test_Plan (track plans using the autoqa PST milestone).
  2. Package Sanity ensures clean install, removal, upgrade, etc of the packages (see sample test output). There is already a 'pst' script in the repository which you can try to perform sanity tests on a downloaded package or package in a repo.
  3. Next steps ...
    • detect that new updates are pushed to bodhi
    • download the package and all relevant packages

Will Woods provide some updates on his AutoQA focus areas:

  1. We have enough info about current bodhi to write a bodhi update watcher, but it may have some shortcomings and will soon be obsoleted
  2. We have a proposed storage encoding for putting test plan metadata in the wiki (see QA:Test_Plan_Metadata_Test_Page), this will be used by the resultsdb

Open discussion - <Your topic here>

Upcoming QA events

Action items

  1. jlaska + fenris02 to review whether F-13-Beta is an option for
  2. kparal will bother other QA members if they have some comments to the test plan :)
  3. maxamillion - send Proventester draft to for final review
  4. maxamillion - Request new proventester FAS group

IRC Transcript

jlaska #startmeeting Fedora Quality Assurance 15:00
zodbot Meeting started Mon Apr 19 15:00:05 2010 UTC. The chair is jlaska. Information about MeetBot at 15:00
zodbot Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 15:00
jlaska #meetingname fedora-qa 15:00
zodbot The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa' 15:00
jlaska #topic Waiting for participants ... 15:00
* maxamillion is here 15:00
jlaska fenris02: maxamillion greetings! 15:00
* kparal waves 15:00
fenris02 g'morning * 15:01
* jlaska salutes kparal and jskladan 15:01
* jskladan ready to serve his master 15:01
maxamillion lol 15:01
jlaska haha, whatever ... I'm here to serve you! 15:02
jlaska a few more minutes ... waiting for wwoods and adamw 15:03
* wwoods poof 15:03
jlaska always with the grand entrance! :D 15:03
maxamillion its all about presentation :) 15:04
jlaska indeed 15:04
jlaska it might be early still for adamw ... or he's still recovering from the blocker meeting on Friday 15:05
jlaska let's get started, and any straglers can join as we go 15:05
jlaska #topic Previous meeting follow-up 15:05
jlaska Good news ... I've got nothing in the previous meeting follow list 15:05
maxamillion +1 15:06
jlaska Bad news ... I've moved it all to the agenda 15:06
jlaska :) 15:06
maxamillion awwww 15:06
maxamillion -1 15:06
jlaska net zero! 15:06
jlaska :) 15:06
maxamillion ? 15:06
jlaska so, let's get started ... we've got a few check-ins to cover today 15:06
jlaska I'll try to keep this under an hour so we can all get back to being productive Fedora contributors 15:07
jlaska #topic Fedora 13 RC test status 15:07
jlaska first up ... just a big thank you to those who helped get the Beta in shape for posting to mirrors 15:08
jlaska the desktop and install matrices (and release criteria) seem to be helping keep focus on the issues that will impact getting the bits out 15:08
maxamillion +1 ... the beta has been awesome! 15:08
jlaska of course, now for our most important QA milestone yet :) 15:09
jlaska the release candidate 15:09
jlaska <insert thunder> 15:09
* kparal inserts thunder 15:09
maxamillion dun dun dunnnn! 15:09
jlaska I'll list a few highlights from the QA schedule ( 15:09
jlaska #info Blocker review - Last friday we had our first F-13-RC blocker meeting, and another is scheduled for this week 15:10
maxamillion #link 15:10
jlaska #info Acceptance test - This thursday a test run is scheduled for a new post-beta anaconda build 15:10
jlaska other significant milestones ... 15:11
jlaska #info 2010-04-29 - Test 'Final' Test Compose 15:11
jlaska #info 2010-05-06 - Test 'Final' RC 15:11
jlaska am I missing anything there? 15:11
* jlaska notes ... test days ... 15:11
jlaska 2 installation related test events coming up 15:12
jlaska Ideally this will help shake out any remaining issues with the storage UI rewrite ... and also put the install test matrix in good shape for the RC 15:12
jlaska #info 2010-04-22 - 15:12
maxamillion oh, random side note on test days, i was wanting to have a test day based around xfce spin and around gnome-shell (separate obviously) .... I'd like to move forward and schedule a test day for the xfce spin 15:12
jlaska #info 2010-04-29 - Preupgrade test day ( 15:13
kparal if we find some blocker bugs on April 29th in Preupgrade test day, what then? 15:13
maxamillion but the gnome-shell test day I think I'm going to not move forward on as there seem to be some driver specific issues that i think would skew the results of the test day 15:13
jlaska kparal: yeah, the timing corresponds with the 'test compose', so we'll have to view any bugs in light of the release criteria ... and raise exceptions as needed 15:14
jlaska maxamillion: awesome, would these be for F-13 (or after)? 15:14
* jlaska points to 15:14
maxamillion jlaska: for F-13 ... I'd like to move forward on the gnome-shell stuff targeted towards F-14 since that will be the default then 15:14
jlaska maxamillion: okay 15:15
jlaska cool, given the graphics bling ... I imagine that'll be a well attended event 15:15
jlaska Only other F-13 testing point I wanted to make ... 15:15
jlaska #info F-13 QA retrospective - now accepting ideas for improvement 15:16
adamw gnrrk? 15:16
adamw why is the meeting now? 15:16
jlaska I know most of you have already been recording what worked, what didn't etc... so thank you for that 15:16
jlaska adamw: last discussed, we agreed to have meeting follow local time, not UTC 15:17
adamw oh, didn't know you changed it already :) 15:17
jlaska yeah, I could have publicized that better 15:17
* jlaska just did it 15:17
maxamillion adamw: I didn't either, I was just around ;) 15:17
jlaska okay, any other F-13 test thoughts before moving on? 15:18
fenris02 meetings need an ical link imho 15:18
jlaska fenris02: when the fedora calendar solution is online, we'd certainly look to integrate with that 15:18
fenris02 f13b is quite distant from an 'update'd system now. 15:18
kparal jlaska: fedora calendar solution - what's that? 15:19
adamw a lovely lovely pony 15:19
maxamillion #link 15:19
* maxamillion needs to schedule that but figured I'd link about it 15:19
jlaska kparal: there are older threads on infrastructure list ... but adamw sums it up well 15:20
jlaska moving on ... 15:20
jlaska #topic Bodhi QA workflow status check-in 15:20
fenris02 can we get a BFO image for f13b? 15:20
jlaska fenris02: yes we can ... we'll need ot file a request with infrastructure team to update their config 15:20
jlaska fenris02 are you able to follow up on that? 15:21
fenris02 -enoclue ... but i'll take it offline 15:21
kparal I thought there was BFO for F13Beta: 15:21
jlaska #info fenris02 asked how to update with F-13-Beta 15:21
fenris02 kparal, it is listed, but last i looked the image did not give you the f13 option 15:22
kparal ok 15:22
jlaska;a=blob;f=bfo/pxelinux.cfg/fedora_install.conf;h=26acb46afa285f999356c912305395294240b0dd;hb=HEAD 15:22
jlaska looks like a config exists in the pxelinux config for 15:23
jlaska not sure if that change is live yet 15:23
jlaska let's follow-up after 15:23
jlaska #action jlaska + fenris02 to review whether F-13-Beta is an option for 15:23
fenris02 thanks 15:23
jlaska fenris02: thanks for raising the question 15:24
jlaska okay ... back to /topic 15:24
jlaska adamw, do you have any updates on this front? 15:24
adamw nothing springs to mind. 15:24
adamw (though my mind feels rather like goo so it's entirely possible i'm forgetting something) 15:25
jlaska ah, monday mornings :) 15:25
jlaska The item I was tracking here was identifying the bodhi2.0 roadmap so we can plan around it 15:25
jlaska s/around/for/ 15:26
jlaska lmacken: around? 15:26
adamw oh, yeah. actually i see emails from luke and mathieu about that in my inbox, from yesterday. haven't read 'em yet. 15:27
jlaska okay ... then let's move on for now and we can circle back outside the meeting 15:28
jlaska objections/concerns? 15:28
adamw looks like they're happily making things work but have not in fact answered my questions yet :) 15:28
jlaska heh, okay ... we like forward progress! 15:28
adamw so, recap: I asked them when they're actually going to be able to implement the improved feedback system in a version of bodhi the rest of us are using 15:29
jlaska possible tangent ... are there requirements for this next version somewhere? 15:29
adamw right now mathieu is working on it in the 'tg2 branch' (turbogears 2), which seems to be the sort of tinkering playground 15:29
jlaska #info adamw asked lmacken and mathieu for a heads up as to when the improved feedback system will be available 15:30
adamw jlaska: they've been working off mine and doug's emails as a template, i believe 15:30
jlaska okay 15:30
jlaska alright, thanks for the update adamw 15:31
jlaska shall we move on? 15:31
adamw sure 15:31
jlaska maxamillion: I've got you up next .. 15:31
jlaska not sure if you're still around 15:31
jlaska #topic Proventesters check-in 15:31
jlaska #info As a nice April fools joke, maxamillion sent out the proventesters draft ( 15:32
jlaska we have have lost maxamillion ... he's double booked at the moment 15:32
jlaska anyone else know what's next for the current provent testers Draft? 15:33
* jlaska wonders if this is dependent on Bodhi workflow changes too 15:33
adamw shouldn't be 15:34
adamw we can go ahead with proventesters without the new feedback stuff. in fact we should, we're still relying on the qa+releng bodge right now 15:34
jlaska right 15:35
jlaska okay ... we'll come back to this later in the meeting, or queue it up for next week 15:35
jlaska This seems like a critical piece if we want to solicit test assistance against critpath outside just this small group 15:36
jlaska #topic Package Acceptance Test Plan check-in 15:36
jlaska We've not talked about the package acceptance test plan in a while 15:36
jlaska but I wanted to bring it back up since the package update acceptance criteria have been finalized ( 15:36
kparal #link 15:36
jlaska kparal has a killer draft test plan (see link above) out for review 15:37
jlaska My first question ... is this something we want to track completion prior to F-13 ... or is this a post F-13 task? 15:37
kparal well I don't think we can implement this before F13 15:38
jlaska kparal: when you say implement ... do you mean the test plan and test automation? 15:38
kparal jlaska: yes. sure we can have a plan, but it will take long time before we do it with AutoQA automatically 15:39
jlaska oh definitely, while the steps in your draft could be done manually ... we'll never scale for that 15:40
jlaska should we move this out of draft ... and track automation separately? 15:41
jlaska or ... keep it in draft until all automation is complete? 15:41
kparal jlaska: we can move it out of draft when we feel it's complete 15:42
kparal we don't have to wait for AutoQA implementation 15:42
jlaska okay 15:42
maxamillion sorry, got called afk 15:42
jlaska kparal: what do you think is remaining, or ... what needs to be addressed to move it out of draft? 15:42
jlaska maxamillion: no worries, I can switch back to that topic shortly if you like 15:43
maxamillion I was in a $dayjob meeting as well as this one and got attention called away from the netbook 15:43
kparal jlaska: well I would like someone credible to say it's ok :) 15:43
maxamillion jlaska: its up to you ... I skimmed the backlog and it looks like we're ready to move forward with the proposal 15:43
kparal but I don't know if we need some approval process or something 15:44
kparal I think it's more QA concern 15:44
jlaska kparal: yeah, I agree 15:44
adamw it seems good to me 15:45
jlaska kparal: I wouldn't call myself credible ... but I'll be happy to reread and send thoughts to the list 15:45
kparal so, let's have a final conversation over it and we are satisfied, we can mark it as final 15:45
jlaska this problem space is still a moving target in some respects ... so it wouldn't surprise me if the test plan were to adjust as we learn 15:45
jlaska kparal: sounds like a plan 15:45
kparal sounds like an action item for me :) 15:45
jlaska #info kparal asked for additional input on the package update acceptance test plan 15:46
jlaska kparal: are you able to send that out to the list this week? 15:46
kparal action item - kparal will bother other QA members if they have some comments to the test plan :) 15:46
jlaska #action kparal will bother other QA members if they have some comments to the test plan :) 15:46
kparal hehe 15:46
jlaska kparal: awesome, thank you :) 15:47
kparal alright 15:47
jlaska kparal: anything else you want to track or note? 15:47
adamw like i said, the plan looks fine to me 15:47
kparal jlaska: no, that's fine 15:47
jlaska okay ... jumping back ... 15:48
jlaska #topic Proventesters check-in 15:48
jlaska #info maxamillion notes, "it looks like we're ready to move forward with the proposal" 15:48
maxamillion should we start up a vote? or more review needed? 15:48
adamw i don't think it really needs voting on? that's not how we've usually implemented policies 15:49
maxamillion oh ok 15:49
adamw i'd say just send a note to the list that it's the final draft and it'll go into effect unless anyone has serious objections 15:49
jlaska maxamillion: how do you feel about the QA mentor aspect ... is that established or well known? 15:49
maxamillion I'm new to this :) .... its my first policy draft 15:49
jlaska maxamillion: same here :P 15:49
adamw did you remove the CLA requirement as per jesse's feedback? 15:49
jlaska "It is compulsory to sign the CLA (contributor licence agreement) for participating in this group. " 15:50
adamw jlaska: well if it were something that required FESCo approval or something obviously we'd have to send it to them, but AFAICT it isn't. this is entirely within QA's domain... 15:50
jlaska adamw: okay 15:50
jlaska so once this is finalized ... what's next? 15:51
maxamillion adamw: no, that I had not 15:51
jlaska * link to kparal's package update acceptance test plan? 15:51
jlaska * link to Category:Test Cases for test guidance? 15:51
maxamillion adamw: I left that just because it was pulled from the ambassadors 15:51
jlaska * request proventester FAS group ... and start managing this sucker? 15:51
adamw sounds about right 15:52
adamw maybe call out on the list for people to apply 15:52
maxamillion +1 15:53
maxamillion jlaska: if you'd list, just make some action items for me and I'll take care of that stuff :) 15:53
jlaska maxamillion: oh boy, carte blanche for action items! 15:54
jlaska maxamillion: so you're sending the draft to the list for final comments? 15:54
adamw maxamillion: my god. what have you done? 15:54
jlaska unleash the tasks! 15:54
maxamillion lol 15:54
jlaska #action maxamillion - send Proventester draft to for final review 15:54
jlaska #action Request new proventester FAS group 15:55
maxamillion jlaska: yeah, send for final comments, then put in request to infrastructure/rel-eng to have the appropriate changes made on their end for the group 15:55
jlaska #undo 15:55
zodbot Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Action object at 0x2b03b0d0df90> 15:55
jlaska #action maxamillion - Request new proventester FAS group 15:55
jlaska that should do it for now ... thanks maxamillion! 15:55
jlaska okay ... last topic for today ... 15:56
jlaska #topic AutoQA check-in 15:56
jlaska wwoods: kparal and jskladan have a lot of updates on the AutoQA front from last week 15:56
jlaska I didn't want to spend a lot of time reviewing the details here ... but hopefully each of you can point out the highlightzx 15:56
jlaska hightlights 15:56
jskladan sure 15:57
jlaska and links for additional info in case others want to participate or contribute? 15:57
jlaska who wants to go first? 15:57
kparal jskladan :) 15:57
* jskladan me. me me me me :) 15:57
wwoods go man go! 15:57
jlaska hehe 15:57
jlaska jskladan: go for it my good man 15:57
* jlaska will follow with the annoying meetbot tags 15:58
jskladan first of all, we finally managed to push Autotest test tag (id in database and some other stuff which identifies testrun) to the autotest-client 15:58
jlaska although, feel free to use #link and #info 15:58
jskladan i.e. to the AutoQA tests 15:58
jskladan there is some discussion going on about the patch in mailing list 15:58
jskladan but hopefully it will be upstream until the end of the week 15:59
jlaska #info Test results sent to autoqa-results will include a link to the autotest results for additional details (patches under review) 15:59
jskladan #info Getting URLs of test results from AutoQA testruns is nearly finished 15:59
jskladan heh 15:59
jskladan #undo 15:59
jlaska jskladan: cool, nice work! and thanks to _lmr_ for the tip! 15:59
_lmr_ :) 16:00
_lmr_ I am so glad it worked out OK 16:00
jskladan other that that - beakerlib based tests (initscrip testing) finally got to the production machine, and are producing results 16:00
* jlaska grabs link ... 16:00
jlaska #link 16:01
fenris02 upstart, sysvinit or both types of initscripts? 16:01
jlaska #info the beakerlib-based initscript test is now in production and sending results 16:01
jskladan sysV i guess - it's testing LSB compliance of return codes 16:02
* Oxf13 peeks in 16:02
jlaska Oxf13: welcome :) 16:02
jskladan and finally, we made a progress on the ResultsDB front. We have finished the db schema <> and accepted a input API <> 16:03
jlaska #info made a progress on the ResultsDB front. We have finished the db schema <> and accepted a input API <> 16:03
jskladan and we'll start prototyping the application this week 16:03
jskladan i'll set up a XMLRPC based API and hack few tests to put results into the ResultDB 16:04
jlaska exciting stuff! 16:04
jskladan next important step on the ResultsDB road will be creating a frontend which will publish the data 16:04
jskladan which will help us in proposing the correct API for digging data from ResultsDB 16:05
wwoods it's important to note that we're designing the resultsDB backend to be a unified storage backend for *multiple* frontends for various types of tests 16:05
jlaska #info Next steps ... prototyping the resultsdb and using an XMLRPC based API to populate with results 16:06
* jskladan passing the talk-stick to kparal & wwoods 16:06
jlaska #info Next steps ... Creating a front-end which will be used for review/publish the data 16:06
jlaska jskladan: thanks for the updates :) 16:06
wwoods there may not ever be a generic resultsdb interface/frontend - and that's intentional 16:06
kparal wow, jskladan said almost everything 16:07
kparal I think just PST remains for me 16:07
jlaska jskladan: stole the thunder! 16:07
kparal well then, Package Sanity Tests 16:07
jlaska wwoods: good point ... I don't see a General Test Plan on the horizon any time soon :D 16:07
* jlaska once again encourages excessive use of #info 16:07
kparal here are some links 16:08
kparal #link 16:08
kparal #link 16:08
kparal Package Sanity ensures clean install, removal, upgrade, etc of the packages 16:08
kparal there is already a 'pst' script in the repository which you can try to perform sanity tests on a downloaded package or package in a repo 16:09
kparal (altough there is now a bug reported that downgrade test fails) 16:09
* jlaska sees a autoqa pst branch ... cool! 16:09
kparal I work on this with Petr Splichal 16:09
kparal #info code for sanity tests is in AutoQA pst branch 16:10
jlaska #link;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/pst 16:10
kparal the autoqa wrapper is not in yet, but I'm working on some basic proof of concept 16:10
kparal this will depend on the new bodhi features and the whole depcheck stuff wwoods is working on 16:11
kparal we need to 1) detect that new updates is pushed to bodhi 16:11
* jlaska likes the sample test output @;a=blob;f=tests/package_sanity/examples/cheese-rpm-summary.txt;h=830a0a9311eb4e8442fd3858c0ad67ce694ad6c9;hb=refs/heads/pst 16:11
kparal and 2) download the package and all relevant packages 16:11
kparal so this is pretty related to stuff wwoods is working on with lmacken 16:12
kparal alright, that would be it for today, passing microphone along... 16:12
jlaska kparal: bonus points for a good segway :) 16:12
jlaska kparal: thanks for the updates ... another cool use of beakerlib :) 16:13
jlaska wwoods: any highlights from your AutoQA realm? 16:13
jlaska uh oh ... did we lose wwoods? 16:15
jlaska quick ... this means wwoods gets the remaining action items that we were saving for maxamillion 16:16
kparal :D 16:16
* jskladan would like to pity wwoods, but is afraid, that the action items woul fall to his head then :-D 16:17
jlaska alright, looks like we lost wwoods ... hopefully he can follow-up on the list with any highlights 16:18
jlaska that's it for the agenda today ... open discussion time 16:18
jlaska #topic Open discussion - <Your topic here> 16:18
jlaska If no comments or concerns, I'll #endmeeting in 1 minute 16:19
wwoods ah! 16:19
wwoods I don't have any real developments to report WRT autoqa; most of last week was discussions about bodhi updates for depcheck etc. and resultsdb discussion (which jskladan covered) 16:20
wwoods I think we have enough info about current bodhi to write a update watcher, but it may have some shortcomings and will soon be obsoleted 16:20
* jlaska amazed at how complex depcheck has become (wrt rejecting bodhi updates that fail acceptance criteria) 16:20
wwoods it's a pretty complicated problem overall 16:21
wwoods but solving it allows us to do a lot of similar testing 16:21
wwoods so it's worthwhile 16:21
jlaska yeah, your discussion w/ lmacken + Oxf13 last week definitely opened my eyes to that 16:21
* jlaska info's 16:22
Oxf13 what's funny is all the people who have been saying "It's so easy, why aren't you doing it already?" 16:22
jlaska #info AutoQA depcheck - we have enough info about current bodhi to write a update watcher, but it may have some shortcomings and will soon be obsoleted 16:22
Oxf13 funny, with a capital FU 16:22
jlaska Oxf13: :D 16:23
jlaska wwoods: alrighty, thanks for the updates 16:23
wwoods if it's so easy, why hasn't anyone done it yet? or why haven't YOU done it, Mr. Hypothetical Question Guy 16:23
jlaska I haven't heard any additional thoughts discussion topics ... and we're well over hour time slice 16:23
wwoods oh also - did I mention this last week? - we have a proposed storage encoding for putting test plan metadata in the wiki 16:23
wwoods and some code to pull that data back out as nice python dicts (or whatever) 16:23
jlaska #info AutoQA - we have a proposed storage encoding for putting test plan metadata in the wiki, and some code to pull that data back out as nice python dicts 16:24
wwoods see 16:24
wwoods has the link to the parsing code 16:25
wwoods that's all I can think of, and yeah, we're way in overtime 16:25
jlaska wwoods: thanks for the links 16:25
jlaska okay gang, thanks for your time ... go in peace! 16:26
jlaska #endmeeting 16:26

Generated by 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!