From Fedora Project Wiki

< QA‎ | Meetings


People present (lines said):

  1. jlaska (106)
  2. wwoods (23)
  3. adamw (20)
  4. jskladan (20)
  5. kparal (13)
  6. Viking-Ice (6)
  7. jsmith (5)
  8. vaschenb (4)
  9. zodbot (3)
  10. satellit_ (2)
  11. topy (1)
  12. skvidal (1)

Unable to attend:

  1. Liam
  2. Rhe
  3. Newgle1


Previous meeting follow-up

  1. adamw and jlaska to propose artwork final release criteria
No updates, both jlaska and adamw have been busy
Jlaska agreed to send this out to design-team@ for review this week
  1. adamw to update to better describe the test experience on live images
Updates posted to wiki page, thanks Adam
  1. jlaska to update so that it better captures the post-install xdriver=vesa expectations
Adam was in the mood for wiki, thanks
  1. maxamillion update rel-eng TRAC#3860 to request RC#5
Ticket updated, but it was later determined that RC#5 was not required.

F14 Alpha Status

Owner - rhe, adamwill
F-14 Alpha RC#4 compose CD and DVD images accepted as F-14-Alpha (see
Next steps...
Raise awareness of F-14-Alpha known issue ...
  • jsmith asked the docs team to add an admonition to the top of the release notes
  • jsmith noted he would hilight this issue in the announcement mail as well
  • adamw was planning to ask the web group if they can put a one-liner with a link to release notes or common bugs on the download page
Monitor incoming bugs and propose/draft content for for

AutoQA update

Owner - User:wwoods
Jskladan improving how to write autoqa tests wiki page
Vojta posted upgrade-path test for review -- autoqa ticket#123
Wwoods and kparal discussed depcheck test cases, and posted initial tests for feedback -- autoqa ticket#202
Kparal noted that standardized hook argument patch set accepted ... multi-hook tests now possible
Kparal posted patch to correct failing rpmguard tests
Next steps...
Jlaska - apply and test kparal's koji_utils fix and report results
Jskladan to add "how to run autoqa test" note to the "how to write autoqa tests" wiki
Complete review of upgrade-path test -- autoqa ticket#123
Jskladan to post updated Writing_AutoQA_Tests to match the recent changes (control.autoqa, using AutoQATest, hook args, etc.)
Complete depcheck test cases -- autoqa ticket#202
Jskladan and Wwoods to collaborate on mash support
Kparal and Wwoods to collaborate on depcheck unittest framework and remaining tests

Open discussion - <Your topic here>

Upcoming QA events

Action items

  1. jlaska to publish F-14-Alpha QA retrospective page
  2. (autoqa) jlaska apply and provide results against autoqa patch (
  3. (autoqa) jskladan to add "how to run autoqa test" note to the "how to write autoqa tests" wiki

IRC Transcript

jlaska #startmeeting Fedora QA Meeting 15:00
zodbot Meeting started Mon Aug 23 15:00:24 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 #topic Gathering .... 15:01
* kparal available for the next 45 minutes 15:01
jlaska #meetingname fedora-qa 15:01
zodbot The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa' 15:01
* vaschenb 15:01
* jsmith is here 15:01
* wwoods here 15:02
adamw yo 15:02
* Viking-Ice here 15:02
* jlaska figures joza is lurking 15:04
jlaska alright ... let's get started so we can have kparal here for autoqa time 15:04
jlaska #topic Previous meeting follow-up 15:05
* jskladan lurks 15:05
jlaska jskladan hey there lurker! 15:05
jlaska #info adamw to update to better describe the test experience on live images 15:06
jlaska looks like this got some recent edits 15:06
adamw yeah, it should be right now. 15:06
jlaska thanks adamw, I see the live qualifications ... looks good 15:07
jlaska #info jlaska to update so that it better captures the post-install xdriver=vesa expectations 15:07
jlaska I believe this is complete ... and not because of me 15:07
* adamw did that too 15:07
jlaska adamw was a wiki editing machine last week 15:07
jlaska #info maxamillion update rel-eng TRAC#3860 to request RC#5 15:08
jlaska maxa completed this ... but turned out we had a course correction and RC#5 wasn't required 15:08
jlaska #info adamw and jlaska to propose artwork final release criteria 15:08
adamw man, we suck 15:09
jlaska a classic ... adamw, my name has been on that one, but I haven't touched it. Do you want me to reach out to design-team for thoughts? 15:09
adamw if you could that'd be great 15:09
adamw or if you're busy i can do it 15:09
adamw either way 15:09
jlaska alright, I'll fire that off this week 15:09
jlaska that's all I had from last week ... let's dive into the agenda 15:10
jlaska #topic F14 Alpha QA Status 15:10
jlaska well, first off ... congrats everyone 15:10
jlaska yet another Fedora release milestone behind us 15:10
adamw *party poppers* 15:10
jlaska they just keep on coming, don't they 15:10
kparal *enjoys* 15:11
jlaska adamw: I know you wanted to raise awareness on the radeon issue ... was there anything you wanted to discuss there? 15:11
adamw jlaska: yeah, i'm a bit uneasy on that, i was assuming we'd have the readiness meeting to do it, but apparently we didn't schedule another readiness meeting even though the release was delayed (seems odd to me) 15:12
adamw so i'll have to contact docs and websites teams directly, i haven't done that yet, i'll do it today 15:12
jlaska jsmith: anything you can think of to help elevate the visibility of 15:13
jlaska #info adamw wants to raise awareness of known radeon display issue ( 15:15
jlaska have folks been testing with F-14-Alpha + updates-testing? 15:15
wwoods that's what I'm running 15:15
jlaska it was only an improvement for me after the update ... that was good news 15:16
jlaska adamw: CommonBugs looks in good shape ... anything else on your radar to close out F-14-Alpha for QA? 15:16
adamw me too 15:16
adamw it's slightly rough with all the gnome changes 15:16
jsmith jlaska: I've asked the Docs folks to add an admonition to the one-page release notes for F14 Alpha 15:17
jlaska jsmith: ah nice, thank you 15:17
adamw jsmith: awesome, thanks 15:17
adamw jsmith: i'm planning on asking the web group if they can put a one-liner with a link to release notes or common bugs on the download page 15:18
jsmith I think we'll also highlight it in the announcement email 15:18
jlaska both good ideas 15:19
adamw no need to self-flagellate, just a quick mention with a link is fine 15:19
jlaska adamw: I created an F14 QA retrospective wiki stub last week ... but I'll clean that up a bit and send that out so we can start collecting the good/bad/ugly 15:20
jlaska #action jlaska to publish F-14-Alpha QA retrospective page 15:20
jlaska in case it wasn't clear ... *huge* thanks again to all who contributed testing, especially the fast turn around on RC#4. While we did end up slipping for another issue, it was very helpful to have a sense for how the installer and desktop test matrices held up to the alpha release criteria 15:22
jlaska adamw: any other Alpha topics/thoughts (or Jerry Springer final thoughts)? 15:22
adamw of course, what this has all showed is that the really important thing is family... 15:23
jlaska LOL! 15:23
adamw er, nope. :) 15:23
jlaska alrighty ... well done 15:23
jlaska alright ... do you hear the music? 15:24
jlaska that's not Duff man ... it's AutoQA time 15:24
jlaska #topic AutoQA Package Acceptance 15:24
jskladan well, no funky updates from me - i've been testing F14 a bit, and focused mostly on the "how to write autoqa tests" wiki 15:25
jlaska I know F-14 pulled away some time+energy from some autoqa work, but it appears there was some progress last week 15:25
kparal my patch that standardized some hook args was accepted, so it created better options for multihook tests 15:26
jlaska jskladan: awesome, I can't wait to see the updated wiki page ... so much has changed with some of the recent patch sets 15:27
jlaska standardized hook args being one of the big ones! 15:27
jlaska how's the multi-hook milestone looking? 15:27
* jlaska checks 15:27
wwoods and control.autoqa, and new stuff in control files and test wrappers 15:27
jlaska down to only 1 ticket in the multi-host milestone ... that's great 15:28
jlaska 15:28
kparal multi-hook milestone is almost finished, now only to schedule tests for multiple hooks, which should be piece of cake. the framework is ready 15:28
jlaska vaschenb: have you had a chance to look at those multi-hook tests kparal mentioned? Does that seem do-able with the time remaining? 15:30
jlaska vaschenb: I'm sure multi-hook guru kparal can help answer any questions too :) 15:31
jlaska wwoods: how's the depcheck front progressing? 15:31
vaschenb jlaska: not yet, today I worked on upgradepath output... 15:31
kparal I requested some upgradepath output format improvement at vaschenb :) 15:31
wwoods jlaska: we've got some new unittests in depcheck that actually, like, prove that depchecking works as expected 15:31
wwoods at least partially 15:31
vaschenb jlaska: I'll take a look at it, but today I'm functionless 15:32
jlaska wwoods: Bonus points for using built-in python unittest module! That's really cool looking stuff 15:32
wwoods I split it up into a module and a CLI so we can keep the tool and the tests in different files.. little cleaner that way 15:32
wwoods so the next thing to do is to start using mash instead of createrepo 15:32
wwoods so we can actually handle multilib stuff properly 15:32
jlaska #info jskladan improving 'how to write autoqa tests' wiki page 15:32
* jlaska info's 15:33
jlaska #info kparal standardized hook argument patch set accepted ... multi-hook tests now possible 15:33
jlaska #info vaschenb improving upgrade-path test output 15:33
jlaska #info wwoods posted info about depcheck unit test framework 15:34
wwoods mostly last week was about cleaning things up - f14a kind of took priority 15:34
jlaska yeah ... these darn milestones! 15:35
jlaska #info wwoods posted thoughts on depcheck next steps -- 15:35
jlaska wwoods: you get any lucky volunteers for the mash work yet? 15:36
wwoods jlaska: unfortunately I think I volunteered myself 15:36
jlaska did everyone step back (but you)? 15:36
jsmith jlaska: I think that's closer to the truth 15:37
jlaska doh! 15:37
jskladan wwoods: i said i'll dig into that 15:37
jskladan maybe not too loud :) 15:37
jlaska hehe 15:37
wwoods jskladan: heh! maybe so. That'd be great 15:38
jlaska yeah, +1 on the thanks jskladan 15:38
jskladan wwoods: yeah, no problem at all. I'll have it on my radar, once i finish the wiki edit 15:38
wwoods I'll try to help round up some info from the mash 'experts' 15:38
skvidal s/mash experts/notting/ 15:38
jlaska there were 2 other non-depcheck items that I was aware of ... kparal do you want to talk about your latest patch to the list? 15:39
wwoods mash seems to be one of those things where nobody fully understands it, so anyone who touches it immediately becomes a new 'expert' 15:39
kparal ah, yes. well 15:39
kparal this patch: 15:40
* jskladan looking forward to be the so called expert on yet another fancy field :) 15:40
jlaska #info some rpmguard tests failing, see kparal's proposed patch 15:40
kparal I think the code was wrong all the time. we requested the last release of a certain package, but we didn't check the provided repo, just its parents 15:41
kparal which I didn't really understood and I believe it was wrong, until someone proves me otherwise :) 15:41
wwoods very possible 15:42
kparal so I have rewritten it to a behaviour I suppose it's correct, and by the way it also fixed the traceback we received before 15:42
jlaska should I just apply this patch to our current instance? 15:42
kparal jlaska: I believe it should work (better than before) 15:42
jlaska kparal: okay, I'll apply and respond with results 15:43
kparal jlaska: yes please 15:43
* kparal has to run, sorry 15:43
jlaska #action jlaska apply and provide results against autoqa patch ( 15:43
jlaska kparal: cya 15:43
jlaska the other non-depcheck issue was vaschenb upgrade-path test 15:43
jlaska I commented that I thought we'd probably want a method of running this test outside of the test harness (for folks who play the autoqa home-game) 15:44
jlaska but then kparal and vaschenb pointed out that you can run the tests locally using a method I wasn't aware of 15:44
jlaska just using 'autoqa post-bodhi-update --local ...' 15:44
* jskladan likes (and heavily uses) the --local) 15:44
jlaska wwoods: did you have any thoughts on that approach vs a stand-alone script? 15:45
wwoods either way seems fine to me 15:46
jlaska I really like the stand-alone version, but then that means we have to write multiple option parsers etc... 15:46
jlaska I don't often install 'autoqa' when testing out of git ... so I'm not familiar with this method 15:47
wwoods I guess I just want to make sure we recognize that writing a test this way is not the most obvious (or simplest) path for general audiences 15:47
jlaska as long as we document how to run the test somewhere, right? 15:47
wwoods if you're skilled at hacking around in autoqa already then yeah, this totally works and saves you having to write option parsers etc. 15:48
wwoods but for people who are like "hey I want to write a test, how does autoqa work" I'm still going to suggest "Write the test first, you don't need to know the full details of how autoqa works until you have a working test" 15:48
jskladan well, my opinion is also a bit torn between these two options - having the test as "standalone" is absolutely superb for non-autoqa geeks 15:48
jskladan but some tests can benefit a big time from the autoqa libs 15:49
jlaska jskladan: you can still use autoqa libs for the stand-alone test 15:49
jlaska just not autotest libs 15:49
jskladan well, if you "make install" the autoqa, that is 15:49
wwoods in short: I'm happy with both methods, but that means we need to support two ways of writing tests 15:50
jlaska at least, that was my understanding of 'stand-alone' ... but this topic pointed out that the definition of 'stand-alone' was a bit vague 15:50
wwoods one for autoqa hackers only, and one that's for everyone 15:50
jskladan i do like the --local, because i do not have to provide a arg parser for my script 15:50
jskladan (because autoqa parses it for me) 15:50
jlaska that's nice 15:51
jskladan but i sure do understand the stand-alone benefits 15:51
jskladan and i totally agree with will on "write the test first" for non-autoqa-hackers 15:51
jlaska so it doesn't seem there is a _wrong_ way to do this ... and this can be left as an exercise for the author? 15:52
wwoods so yeah I think we're agreed here: non-standalone tests are totally acceptable - and really handy for proficient autoqa hackers 15:52
jlaska #info in response to Vojta's upgrade-path patch, the group agreed that non-standalone tests are totally acceptable - and really handy for proficient autoqa hackers 15:53
jskladan i belive, that we can all agree, that we should document (and highlight) the --local option 15:53
jskladan so the non-hackers are able to run current tests 15:53
jlaska more docs! 15:53
jskladan (maybe a note on the "how to write tests"?) 15:53
wwoods yeah, definitely! 15:53
jskladan jlaska: docs rock the world :) 15:53
jlaska jskladan: :D 15:54
jlaska alrighty ... anything other autoqa topics? 15:54
jskladan so, i'll add a "how to run the test" note to the wiki page 15:54
jlaska jskladan: feel free to queue up a ticket for future consumption 15:54
jlaska this is one that even I can probably help with ... esp since I'd like to learn this method 15:55
jskladan #action jskladan to add "how to run autoqa test" note to the "how to write autoqa tests" wiki 15:55
jlaska vaschenb: wwoods: anything else from you guys? 15:55
wwoods nope, I'm good 15:55
vaschenb jlaska: nothing 15:55
jlaska alright, thanks folks ... love seeing the patch review and test progress on 15:56
jlaska great to see things moving forward 15:56
jlaska Okay ... it's that time again ... 15:56
jlaska #topic Open Discussion - <your topic here> 15:56
jlaska anything to discuss/review/debate that we haven't already touched on? 15:57
jlaska if nothing raised, I'll close out the meeting in 2 minutes 15:57
* adamw has nothing 15:58
topy I search technical documentation about architectural of fedora cluster (redhat), but I don't find nothing of interesting. Can someone drive me to some useful links ? 15:58
jsmith topy: Please don't interrupt the meeting to ask a non-related question 15:59
jlaska Closing out in 30 seconds ... 15:59
Viking-Ice jlaska: I wanted to ask if it has been considered to the nightly composes actually would use updates-testing or special koji repo for their compose.. 15:59
Viking-Ice so testers would get the latest bits instead of some outdated ones 16:00
jlaska Viking-Ice: I believe we talked about that at a previous meeting ... kparal raised that topic in your absence 16:00
* jlaska finds 16:00
Viking-Ice Oh I see 16:00
jlaska 16:00
jlaska Viking-Ice: you might want to add your point to the QA retrospective once I post the link ... 16:01
adamw note, not captured in the summary there, nirik's explanation: 16:01
adamw " the idea was that we should be testing the thing that we would ship." 16:01
jlaska it would be a nice addition to the current live image process, but I don't think I'd want it to *replace* the live images used now 16:02
jlaska adamw: thanks 16:02
Viking-Ice we got alpha beta etc images for that 16:02
satellit_ Are the nightly composes working? last one for soas seems to be the 18th 16:02
Viking-Ice satellit_: offtopic ask in QA 16:03
satellit_ ok 16:03
jlaska satellit_: they appear to have failed ... we can follow-up with nirik in #fedora-qa 16:04
jlaska alright folks ... thanks for your time 16:04
jlaska I'll send minutes to the list 16:04
jlaska #endmeeting 16:04

Generated by 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!