[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: 2009-04-15 16:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting minutes

IRC transcript and online notes available at

= Attendees =

* Will Woods (wwoods)
* Adam Williamson (adamw)
* Jóhann Guðmundsson (viking_ice)
* John Brown (tk009)
* Jesse Keating (f13)
* James Laska (jlaska)

= Previous meeting follow-up =

# [jlaska+adamw] mediawiki semantic update (packaging and hosting)
#* ''REVIEWED'' - [[rhbug:490001|490001]] -  Review Request:
mediawiki-semantic - The semantic extension to mediawiki 
#* ''UNDER REVIEW'' - [[rhbug:490171|490171]] -  Review Request:
mediawiki-semantic-forms - An extension to MediaWiki that adds support
for web-based forms
#** [[User:tibbs]] posted some additional concerns for
''mediawiki-semantic-forms'' around licensing which I haven't followed
up on yet
#** fedora-infrastructure request
[https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-infrastructure-list/2009-April/msg00050.html sent] for fedoraproject.org/wiki database copy for testing
# [jlaska] - reach out to pmuller on packaging rhtslib
#* Discussed briefly with pmuller the current status of rhtslib
packaging, will reach out again this week
# [jlaska] - improve the kickstart file used for generating test day
live images
#* Documented test day live image procedur at
[[QA/Test_Days/Live_Image]] (thanks to [[User:katzj]] for guidance)
# [adamw] - send details of nss rawhide issue to warren for posting to
#* Submitted for review and posted at
# [jlaska] - talk to John Poelstra about adding a few F11Blocker review
meetings to the schedule
#* Discussed with [[User:poelstra]], the schedule has a blocker bug
review meetings (see task#39 in schedule
#* Will save the open issue of "what makes a bug a blocker?"  for later
in this meeting (see below)
# [adamw] - review Test Day X11 bugs to ensure they are represented on
#* noveau bugs - I was looking at nouveau bugs, then checked in with
darktama and he says he's already doing a review of all of them himself
#* radeon/intel bugs - I will talk to matej and francois about
#* I am a bit worried about radeon, there are rather a lot of open
reports on it, several looking quite serious
# [wwoods] - review pulseaudio/alsa bugs and work with lennart and
jaroslav for F11Blocker representation
#* working with Lennart (PA author) and Jaroslav (kernel sound
maintainer) we've determined 
#*# PulseAudio is *not* at fault (see
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485734#c16) and 
#*# Intel sound hardware sometimes is flaky about reporting certain bits
about its internal state
#* as of kernel -70 it should be fixed for a majority of cases
#* Two blocker bugs [[rhbug:485734|intel-hda: snd_pcm_avail()
overflows]] and [[rhbug:472339|snd-intel8x0: timing unstable
(snd_pcm_avail() overflows, signals POLLOUT when it shouldn't)]]
#* Will noted it would be good to have a test day for pulseaudio, but
consensus was there is no room in the test day schedule and the hardware
people are having issues on is '''very''' common

= Autoqa update =

* Next steps: 
** continue improving existing test reporting
** interim goal of sending automated test result mails to
** wwoods suggested there are fixes that he would like to get into
upstream beaker
** reach out to pmuller for information on packaging rhtslib

= F-11 Blocker Bugs =

James Laska asked to brainstorm on a way to open up the process of
assessing milestone blocker bugs.  Adam noted he has been engaging the
bugzapper team on this topic but they have expressed concerns as they
feel ''they might not do it right.''  Will Woods acknowledged that
expanding and clarifying release criteria (or having separate
blockercriteria) might be a good idea.

There are several resources available now:
* [[QA/ReleaseCriteria]] - current release criteria list
* [[User:Beland/Bugzilla_Legend#Severity_and_Priority]] - draft bugzilla
severity and priority definitions

Adam noted I guess if we adopted that system going forward, triage would
naturally feed into blocker bug evaluation

Jesse questioned whether ''exposing and actually trusting
severity/priority in bugs is worthwhile ...  Every person's pet bug is
high priority high severity.''  

Jesse asked what success would look like for a trial run?
* no revert wars, positive feedback from maintainers looking at their
bug lists 
* community participation in the escalation of blocker bugs

Jesse offered concern that the first instinct of many people will be to
think that QA will want to force what people will work on.
* James suggested QA just provides data/guidance on the bugs.  How the
list acted on is a different topic.

Adam summarized by noting he is working on a draft for developer
feedback, this process is intended to advise developers (not dictate).
If it works great, if it doesn't we'll kick it to the curb, and we can
evaluate down the road how severity/priority and blocker lists
are/should be interacting.

Jesse suggested that ''Triage and setting of priority/severity can
certainly help the maintainer make that decision, so long as they have
the ultimate say''.  Jesse also concluded that ''whatever helps us or
maintainers find the critical issues sooner rather than later will

Jóhann added that this will never work.  Adam encouraged optimism.

= Open discussion =

There wasn't enough time for open discussion in the meeting.  Please
send thoughts/ideas to fedora-test-list redhat com 

== fedora-qa-bookmarks package? == 

Cool idea proposed by wwoods - a Fedora QA bookmarks package
(installable for test days, rawhide testers, live images etc...).  Jesse
Keating noted it's a challenge to have this co-exist with the
fedora-bookmarks package.

= Upcoming QA events =
* 2009-04-16 - [[Test_Day:Presto_2009-04-16|yum-presto]]
* 2009-04-21 - [[BugZappers/Triage_days]]
* 2009-04-21 - [[Test_Day:2009-04-21|Minimal platform]]
* 2009-04-23 - TAFS (Test A FileSystem)

= Action items =

* [jlaska] - announce live image create wiki update to fedora-test-list
* [adamw] - discuss with mcepl and francois about radeon and intel
F11Blocker bug status
* [adamw] - post to fedora forums asking for feedback on pulseaudio
* [jlaska] - schedule autoqa discussion w/ wwoods and jkeating - is
there any work we can do prior to F-11 GA?
* [adamw] - send a priority/severity definition draft to
fedora-test-list for review before sending to developers/maintainers

= Next QA meeting =

The next meeting will be held on
[http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingdetails.html?year=2009&month=4&day=22&hour=16&min=0&sec=0&p1=207&p2=204 2009-04-22 16:00 UTC]

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]