From Fedora Project Wiki

< QA‎ | Meetings


  • adamw (138)
  • jreznik (48)
  • Viking-Ice (47)
  • keramidas (15)
  • Martix (13)
  • tflink (10)
  • pschindl (8)
  • zodbot (6)
  • nirik (5)
  • satellit (4)
  • mkrizek (1)


  • Previous meeting follow-up
  • Test Days
  • Open floor

Previous meeting follow-up

  • adamw to push 'automatic blocker' proposal to production - this was done
  • adamw to try and gather a bit more feedback on blocker process changes this week - dgilmore is okay with the changes, no objections from devel or fesco
  • viking-ice or adamw to file a trac ticket for the smoke-test-for-spins idea - not done yet, put back on the agenda for next week
  • tflink to take a look at the question of tracking qa tool discussion and bugs/tickets and make a broad proposal about what to do - proposals made and discussion is underway
    • We agreed to go with the simplest option of keeping one trac instance and CCing ticket mails to the appropriate list with the defaultcc plugin
    • viking-ice noted he is working on a proposal to replace trac with rt

Test Days

  • After discussion of the pros and cons, we decided to make it clearer that test days can happen on any day (not just Thursdays)
  • Other proposed topics left till next week

Open floor

  • jreznik changed the QA calendar for F19 to show blocker meetings on Wednesdays
  • We noted that blocker bug meetings should be starting up already, and discussed scheduling of RATS and TC composes

Action items

  • adamw to push the blocker meeting changes live this week
  • viking-ice or adamw to file a trac ticket for the smoke-test-for-spins idea
  • adamw to propose RATS/TC1 dates on the list
  • tflink to announce first blocker meeting for wednesday, and get blocker bug tracker app ready
  • jreznik to pencil in QA changes as discussed
  • adamw to draft up changes to the test day process docs to accommodate test days being on any day, test day co-ordinator to ensure they're balanced out


adamw #startmeeting Fedora QA meeting 16:01
zodbot Meeting started Mon Mar 4 16:01:26 2013 UTC. The chair is adamw. Information about MeetBot at 16:01
zodbot Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:01
adamw #meetingname fedora-qa 16:01
zodbot The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa' 16:01
adamw #topic roll call 16:01
* satellit listening 16:01
* nirik is lurking in the back 16:01
* mkrizek is here 16:02
adamw where in tarnation is everyone else? 16:03
* pschindl is here 16:03
* jreznik is here 16:03
* Martix is here 16:04
* Viking-Ice joins in 16:04
keramidas #help 16:04
adamw we all feel like that sometimes' 16:05
keramidas sorry first time 16:05
adamw pschindl: any idea where kparal is? 16:05
adamw keramidas: just kidding :) 16:05
adamw #chair satellit pschindl 16:05
zodbot Current chairs: adamw pschindl satellit 16:05
pschindl adamw: kparal is ill, so probably at home in the bed 16:06
adamw oh there you are viking 16:06
adamw ah, so we're missing kparal and tflink. okay 16:06
pschindl and jskladan is also ill 16:06
Viking-Ice does not look like a long meeting agenda anyway 16:06
adamw wow, the plague's hit brno 16:06
jreznik everyone will be ill in the end of meeting 16:06
Viking-Ice except those that had the shark 16:07
pschindl I missed it :( 16:07
* jreznik missed it too, maybe that's the reason pschindl and /me are not ill :D 16:07
adamw #topic Previous meeting follow-up 16:07
adamw heh 16:08
adamw sigh. i hate mondays. juggling qa meetings and vomiting cats 16:08
adamw so easy to mistake one for the other 16:08
adamw "adamw to push 'automatic blocker' proposal to production" - did that 16:08
Martix adamw: I may be ~5-10mins late each time from now for next 3 months 16:08
adamw .fire martix 16:08
zodbot adamw fires martix 16:08
Martix adamw: biking between university faculties 16:09
adamw #info "adamw to push 'automatic blocker' proposal to production" - done: 16:09
jreznik thanks! 16:09
Viking-Ice hurray! 16:10
adamw Martix: c'mon, call up lance armstrong, he has some stuff to help you with that :) 16:10
adamw yay automatic blockers indeed 16:10
adamw should reduce the load some for alpha 16:10
keramidas #commands 16:10
zodbot Available commands: #accept #accepted #action #agree #agreed #chair #commands #endmeeting #halp #help #idea #info #link #lurk #meetingname #meetingtopic #nick #rejected #restrictlogs #save #startmeeting #topic #unchair #undo #unlurk 16:10
adamw "adamw to try and gather a bit more feedback on blocker process changes this week" - well, I poked dgilmore and he didn't object 16:11
adamw i guess at this point we can put those into production, i'm just surprised there were no proposed changes from the tentative ideas from the meeting 16:11
adamw so anyone have any thoughts on those before i go ahead and stick an action item in? 16:11
Viking-Ice do you have a link to that discussion so it can be refreshed in peoples mind again 16:13
jreznik adamw: I like the idea, the description sounds good for me too 16:13
adamw Viking-Ice: just lemme grab it 16:14
adamw Viking-Ice: it' 16:14
adamw it's the stuff about capping at 3hrs etc 16:14
adamw 16:14
Viking-Ice there is nothing i think to add to that from us anyway 16:15
Viking-Ice did you get anyfeed back from -devel/fesco ? 16:16
Viking-Ice which are probably the only wildcard since releng did not object 16:16
adamw it's kinda hard to define 'devel' 16:17
adamw the mail went to devel@ , and no-one said anything 16:17
adamw so we can count that as acceptance, i think :) 16:17
Viking-Ice yup ;) 16:17
jreznik I don't see a reason for objections from devels/fesco 16:18
jreznik all these automatic blockers would end up on the list 16:18
jreznik I hope nobody will abuse the system... to propose other bugs this way (and block the meeting again ;-) 16:19
adamw okay 16:19
adamw let's go ahead and push the button then 16:19
Viking-Ice we can always revisit this stuff anyway 16:19
jreznik yep 16:20
adamw #info "adamw to try and gather a bit more feedback on blocker process changes this week" - dgilmore seems okay with the changes, no objections from devel or fesco 16:20
adamw #action adamw to push the blocker meeting changes live this week 16:20
adamw "viking-ice or adamw to file a trac ticket for the smoke-test-for-spins idea" 16:20
adamw did you do that, viking? i didn't 16:20
Viking-Ice nope not yet 16:21
adamw well, we fail 16:22
adamw #info "viking-ice or adamw to file a trac ticket for the smoke-test-for-spins idea" - not done yet, back on for next week 16:23
adamw #action viking-ice or adamw to file a trac ticket for the smoke-test-for-spins idea 16:23
adamw "tflink to take a look at the question of tracking qa tool discussion and bugs/tickets and make a broad proposal about what to do" 16:23
adamw so, tim did do that - i was hoping to continue the discussion here, but without tim and kamil it seems a bit pointless 16:23
tflink I'm here - late but here 16:24
adamw #info "tflink to take a look at the question of tracking qa tool discussion and bugs/tickets and make a broad proposal about what to do" - proposals made: and discussion is underway 16:24
Viking-Ice is there anything left to discuss seperated qa-devel mailing list which is up and running and a seperated trac instance 16:24
adamw i thought we hadn't made a decision between options 1 and 2 yet. 16:25
Viking-Ice I'm planning on replacing the fedora-qa trac instance with an actual request tracker 16:26
Viking-Ice which scales well and is 21 century mobile friendly 16:26
adamw that would be nice, but we can still improve the trac setup as things stand 16:27
adamw tflink: did you have any further thoughts on option 1 vs. option 2? 16:28
jreznik Viking-Ice: that's that "actual request tracker"? 16:28
Viking-Ice jreznik, not a bug tracker an request tracker there is a difference 16:28
jreznik specific one? 16:28
tflink adamw: not a whole lot - it's a question of how much effort separation is worth 16:29
Viking-Ice jreznik, best practical rt 16:29
tflink jreznik: I think he's talking about RT 16:29
Viking-Ice 16:31
adamw god, they lose many points for me - how can you scare people with an example ticket like "There is no coffee to be found anywhere in the office"? *shivers* 16:32
jreznik do we have any running instance? 16:32
tflink with as close as we are to starting up F19 testing, I'm leaning more towards "leave them in fedora-qa trac" at least until F19 is over 16:32
Viking-Ice jreznik, nope not yet 16:32
tflink jreznik: there are several internal instances, I think 16:33
Viking-Ice tflink, yeah this is F20 item 16:33
adamw looking back over the thread, it looks like there's no real strong objections to going with the 'keep sharing qa trac for now but direct blocker app ticket mails to the qa-devel list' option 16:33
Viking-Ice not that it actually matters 16:33
* nirik has about 0 desire to support another ticketing system. :) 16:33
jreznik the thing is with fesco, we are looking for a better way for tracking features, egh. changes 16:33
Viking-Ice nirik, I will be maintaining this one 16:33
nirik Viking-Ice: cool. 16:34
adamw i think we reassured you that the defaultcc plugin wouldn't affect your migration idea, right viking? 16:34
Viking-Ice had anticipated we dont have knowledge or resource for anything else but trac 16:34
Viking-Ice from infra 16:34
Viking-Ice adamw, no I needlessly worried there 16:34
adamw okay 16:34
* jreznik is interested in that wokflow part, should check it 16:35
* nirik is also interested in anything we can do to improve trac to meet folks needs better. 16:35
adamw so i think for now we can just use defaultcc to send the blocker bug tickets to qa-devel , and we can revisit this topic in future a) if anyone is still unhappy with devel tickets being in the QA trac and/or b) when viking's ready to formally propose RT 16:35
jreznik nirik: that's another option but you know how guys react on just mentioning trac... 16:35
adamw nirik: the idea of a usable mobile interface is kinda nice. 16:35
tflink adamw: works for me 16:36
adamw but not any super high priority for me. 16:36
nirik sure, can look into it. 16:36
adamw #agreed for now we will go with the least-invasive option 1: use the defaultcc plugin to send blocker bug app ticket mails to the qa-devel list. 16:37
Viking-Ice trac is less then optimal as an request tracker 16:37
Viking-Ice it should die ;) 16:37
adamw #agreed we can revisit the topic if there turn out to be problems with that, or if someone is unhappy with the volume of development tickets in qa trac, or when viking is ready to propose RT as an alternative tracker 16:38
adamw okay - so martix has to go do his Tour de University Campus, so I said i'd move open floor up the agenda and the Test Day topic down the agenda to give him time 16:38
adamw so: 16:38
adamw #topic open floor 16:39
adamw anyone have anything to bring up that isn't on the agenda? preferably not involving martix? :) 16:39
Viking-Ice how does killing that stupid test day schedule involve him 16:39
jreznik adamw: have you seen my reply to scheduling blocker bug meetings? 16:39
* jreznik changed the day to Wed 16:40
adamw Viking-Ice: he's doing the test day co-ordination for this cycle 16:40
adamw he actually added the topic 16:40
Viking-Ice adamw, I assume on your authority as the team leader for RH Fedora QA 16:40
adamw #info jreznik changed the QA calendar for F19 to show blocker meetings on wednesdays: 16:40
adamw Viking-Ice: nope, on his authority as 'just decided to go do it' 16:40
jreznik so another topic - scheduling test composes and blocker bug meetings - at least the first ones 16:41
adamw no-one else volunteered, and it doesn't need any authority, so hey 16:41
adamw jreznik: ayup? 16:41
jreznik ? 16:41
adamw oh, i see. 16:41
adamw well, first blocker meeting should be wednesday, i guess. 16:42
jreznik for example test composes are in TJ tight to submission deadline 16:42
jreznik adamw: agree :) 16:42
adamw you're suggesting moving TC1 back a week? 16:42
* Viking-Ice points out last release cycle we more or less had blocker bug meetings everyday ;) 16:42
adamw er, forward? 16:42
adamw er, making it earlier? :) 16:42
adamw Viking-Ice: let's hope that doesn't happen again ;) 16:42
* adamw is generally always in favour of earlier TCs 16:42
jreznik adamw: well, currently it's Thu 2013-01-17 ;-) as it's scheduled based on feature submission deadline for some reason 16:43
adamw hm? qa calendar has Test Alpha 'Test Compose' on 03-26 16:43
adamw releng calendar has "Create Alpha Test Compose (TC)" on same date 16:44
* satellit is there something to test atm? (f19) latest smoke netinstall fails 16:45
jreznik ah, you're right - I was confused by Create Installable Images for QA testing #1 during the schedule cleanup 16:45
* jreznik is trying to cleanup non-senses in the schedule... 16:45
adamw that's for the RATS stuff i believe 16:45
adamw which is still hanging around the schedule... 16:45
satellit ok 16:45
* tflink needs to update the BBA so that it's working with the new naming convention and has F19 milestones 16:46
tflink the production instance, anyways - the code is all there 16:46
jreznik RATS? 16:46
adamw Rawhide Acceptance Test Suite or something like that 16:46
jreznik but I expect I can get rid of it? 16:46
adamw where we run some (supposedly) automated tests on an iso build 16:46
* jreznik has never heard about rats... 16:46
satellit work for f18 16:46
adamw (but in fact it winds up being some poor intern doing them all manually, so it's like a TC but worse) 16:47
jreznik ok 16:47
jreznik sorry for confusion 16:47
adamw i think last cycle we left one 'rats' run in there as a kind of sanity check 16:47
adamw just for someone to go through some basic smoke tests on a boot.iso, ahead of tc1 16:47
jreznik so do we want to continue with that? 16:48
jreznik (with a different schedule of course) 16:48
jreznik there's really a lot of stuff nearly nobody has a clue what does it mean anymore... polluting useful milestones 16:48
adamw yeah, i'm thinking 16:49
adamw TC1 03-19, RATS 03-12 ? 16:49
adamw where 'rats' would just be twu or someone going over a boot.iso 16:49
adamw what do people think of that? 16:49
Martix back 16:49
adamw is the reference for anyone who doesn't have it 16:50
jreznik it makes sense on 03-12 16:50
adamw i always wonder why we have the release notes stuff on our schedule, but hey. 16:51
Martix adamw: historical data states that schedule could be slipped aprox. 2-3 weeks at least :-) 16:51
adamw Martix: historical data bedamned! 16:51
Martix but I hope F19 won't :-) 16:51
* adamw starts poking people at random and saying 'feedback, damnit' 16:52
Martix adamw: wiki-history? :-D 16:52
jreznik adamw: if you don't want RN in a schedule, np 16:52
adamw jreznik: well i mean, maybe someone knows why it's there 16:52
adamw viking, any idea? 16:52
jreznik adamw: that's why I try this cleanup round - it's huge and half of schedule does not make sense even for related teams :) 16:52
adamw heh :) 16:53
adamw good idea 16:53
tflink yeah, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to have RN in the quality schedule 16:53
adamw i'm guessing maybe we're supposed to help them go over new features? or something? hell if i knoiw. 16:53
adamw anyway, we're running short on time here 16:53
adamw jreznik: can you pencil it in as i suggested (03-19 and 03-12) and i'll try and get more feedback on the list? 16:53
adamw #action adamw to propose RATS/TC1 dates on the list 16:54
adamw #action tflink to announce first blocker meeting for wednesday, and get blocker bug tracker app ready 16:54
Viking-Ice adamw, you mean with RN? 16:54
adamw Viking-Ice: yeah 16:54
adamw thought you might remember why it's in our schedule 16:54
Viking-Ice because we are usually those that needed to fill out those "workarounds" ;) 16:55
Viking-Ice or had to in the past 16:55
adamw ah 16:55
adamw seems kinda obsolete now? 16:55
jreznik adamw: you can action me too :) 16:55
adamw or maybe we just forgot :0 16:55
adamw #action jreznik to pencil in QA changes as discussed 16:56
jreznik (not to feel bad in the beginning of the meeting for not having any single follow up ;-) 16:56
adamw #info viking-ice says release notes stuff is in QA's schedule "because we are usually those that needed to fill out those "workarounds" ;) or had to in the past" 16:56
adamw #topic Test Days 16:56
adamw sorry for the railroad, just wanted to get onto this before we run out of time 16:56
adamw so martix says we're nearly out of thursdays but people still want test days 16:57
Martix yep 16:57
Martix going to add Tuesdays 16:57
Viking-Ice kill testday schedule 16:57
pschindl I don't see any problem with other days 16:57
adamw we can open up tuesdays, or make it a free-for-all, or allow any day but wednesday, i guess... 16:57
Martix and Mondays, Fridays... 16:58
Viking-Ice the period opens at branch time and closes before we start composing final 16:58
adamw i'm not really opposed, but just for the record, the idea of doing it on thursdays was to try make it a kind of regular 'tune in next week!' thing - get people to come back for more 16:58
Viking-Ice that's how we intended test day to work 16:58
Viking-Ice when we set it of 16:58
adamw i'm not sure we ever quite got people onto that schedule, though, which may be why no-one but me really minds losing it 16:58
pschindl on TD page is said that Thursdays are only recommended 16:58
jreznik if Martix is willing to spend the time, I'm ok with any day... 16:58
jreznik and it's great there's such demand for test days 16:58
adamw true 16:58
Martix jreznik: I'm just going to add Tuesday to schedule, I run only Desktop-related Test Days :-) 16:59
adamw Viking-Ice: i just copy/paste the schedule from release to release, basically - do yell if you see any errors in it 16:59
Viking-Ice adamw, yes there being schedule et al 16:59
Viking-Ice we only put one to start with something 16:59
jreznik any help with schedule needed? ;-) 16:59
Viking-Ice but already knew if it would take of ( as it has ) it would outgrow it self ;) 17:00
Martix jreznik: I'm glad we got so many proposals, now we need to do better marketing and attract more users to attend 17:00
adamw Viking-Ice: well, we need to have the calendar of test days, of course 17:00
jreznik it's not a bad idea to add test days period to the main schedule 17:00
adamw it seems like there's a consensus to let test days be any time, so let's go with that 17:00
adamw jreznik: sure 17:00
pschindl maybe there shouldn't be anything like "free slot" 17:00
adamw #agreed let's let test days happen any day the proposer wants 17:01
adamw pschindl: right, that's what viking is suggesting 17:01
Viking-Ice what we discussed in the past 17:01
jreznik (and when it works for QA) 17:01
Viking-Ice before you guys got all hired 17:01
adamw and everyone seems fine with it 17:01
adamw so i just 'agreed' it - we can figure out the details later 17:01
adamw Martix: do you want an action item to draft up changes to the test day process docs, or shall i? 17:01
Martix sure, you can 17:02
jreznik just make sure we do not "over test day" people in one week etc. 17:02
adamw right 17:02
adamw but up to the test day co-ordinator to ensure that 17:03
jreznik some distribution over time makes sense, and yes, it's for coordinator 17:03
Viking-Ice fyi test event can span more then single day and arguable should ( even thou maintainer can only be present on one single day ) 17:03
adamw #action adamw to draft up changes to the test day process docs to accommodate test days being on any day, test day co-ordinator to ensure they're balanced out 17:03
adamw Viking-Ice: we have been scheduling more 'test weeks' lately 17:03
adamw it used to be just graphics, but now we have i18n and networking ones too i think 17:03
Viking-Ice and there can be more then single test event on the same day 17:04
jreznik Viking-Ice: it can but it's better for feedback and even marketing to market 1 day with all maintainers around 17:04
Viking-Ice jreznik, we actually planed to host those days without requiring the presence of an maintainer 17:04
jreznik Viking-Ice: well, the main marketing around test days is always - somebody would listen to you and it will be developer (in the best case) 17:05
keramidas may i say something? 17:05
adamw keramidas: sure, you don't need to ask permission 17:05
jreznik but even without devs it makes sense and I like more flexibility up to coordinator 17:05
keramidas hello, i am new here 17:06
adamw hi, welcome 17:06
Viking-Ice jreznik, for what purpose is that coordinator ping marketing? 17:06
keramidas My name is Vasilis ( Bill if you prefer) 17:06
Viking-Ice we need a calender 17:06
Viking-Ice for the QA community 17:07
tflink weren't people working on fedocal stuff for QA? 17:07
keramidas I am from Greece. I am planning to host a presentation at the Univesity on how to contribute to open source communities. So far i have find a lot of people who are willing to participate 17:08
pschindl yes. Lukas is working on QA calendar 17:08
adamw tflink: i poked at the test deployment a bit, it works fine, but the data gets wiped every so often so there's no way to use it for 'production' 17:08
adamw keramidas: great 17:08
keramidas I am going to present the Fedora QA. And i believe this is a good way to attract a lot of people to participate at test days 17:09
adamw keramidas: that would help for sure 17:09
adamw when is your presentation? 17:09
keramidas Basicaly how i started to contribute to the QA 17:10
keramidas and how easy it is 17:10
keramidas and that anyone should do it 17:10
keramidas most of the persons i talked think that you have to be a "rocket scientis" 17:11
keramidas t 17:11
adamw well, that's a shame 17:11
adamw let us know if you have any feedback on how to make it less scary 17:11
keramidas read the wiki, go to the fedora-qa irc and say " Hi, i am new here. How i can help?" 17:13
keramidas that's how i started 17:13
adamw yup, that's what we hope people do! 17:13
adamw okay, we're getting past time now 17:13
adamw thanks for the feedback everyone 17:13
jreznik time to play angry birds for adamw? :) 17:14
adamw #endmeeting 17:14

Generated by 2.11.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!