2009-08-24 - 16:00 UTC - Fedora QA meeting Recap

[Michael Schwendt]

On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 16:53:47 -0400, James wrote:

> On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 10:55 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 20:09:38 -0400, James wrote:
> > 
> > > == AutoQA update from wwoods ==
> > > 
> > > === Recent changes ===
> > > Wwoods updated the group on recent AutoQA activities, including:
> > > * updated conflicts test - it was doing Obsoletes and Conflicts wrong,
> > > and taking 5 hours to run
> > > * Improved email headers for autoqa-results ... includes test, arch and
> > > a summary of errors (e.g. ''repoclosure: 34 packages with unresolved
> > > deps in rawhide-x86_64'')
> > 
> > To get better and correct repoclosure results in those autoqa-results,
> > some work is needed. "Obsoletes" support (as I pointed out in Will's blog).
> > i386 => i586 upgrade support for Fedora 11 and newer. A clear definition
> > of Yum behaviour in multi-arch install "yum update" scenarios.
> 
> Thanks for the feedback Michael!  
> 
> Have you been in touch with Will directly on these points?

No. Is all of this talked about only in private mail or behind other
curtains? IRC/hallways/meetings only? No public mailing-list?
I used to be a subscriber of fedora-qa-list but it has been shut
down very early. Recent documents point to fedora-test-list instead.

> I know a lot
> of work has gone into improving the existing tests ... I'm not sure if
> it addresses your points though.

Well, the Rawhide broken dep report has switched to repoclosure, too
(dunno when exactly, though) and also doesn't handle Obsoletes (which is
the reason why it missed the synce-serial/synce-hal problem e.g.). So,
clearly that is one of the roadblocks before the autoqa-results could
be submitted to the packagers. And if bodhi will ever check for broken
deps in update transactions, it will also need to get it right.