March 2013 - qa-devel - Fedora mailing-lists

Re: [Fedora QA] #349: Implement Bugzilla Email Verification
by fedora-badges 11 Mar '13

11 Mar '13

#349: Implement Bugzilla Email Verification ---------------------------------------+----------------------- Reporter: tflink | Owner: mkrizek Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 19 Component: Blocker bug tracker page | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: Blocked By: | Blocking: 347 ---------------------------------------+----------------------- Changes (by mkrizek): * owner: tflink => mkrizek * cc: qa-devel@… (added) -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/349#comment:1> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 0

Re: [Fedora QA] #348: Store Bugzilla Email Association in Database
by fedora-badges 11 Mar '13

11 Mar '13

#348: Store Bugzilla Email Association in Database ---------------------------------------+----------------------- Reporter: tflink | Owner: mkrizek Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 19 Component: Blocker bug tracker page | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: Blocked By: | Blocking: 347 ---------------------------------------+----------------------- Changes (by mkrizek): * owner: tflink => mkrizek * cc: qa-devel@… (added) -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/348#comment:2> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 0

Re: [Fedora QA] #347: Implement Bugzilla Account Association
by fedora-badges 11 Mar '13

11 Mar '13

#347: Implement Bugzilla Account Association ---------------------------------------+----------------------- Reporter: tflink | Owner: mkrizek Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 19 Component: Blocker bug tracker page | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: Blocked By: | Blocking: ---------------------------------------+----------------------- Changes (by mkrizek): * cc: qa-devel@… (added) * owner: tflink => mkrizek -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/347#comment:1> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 0

Re: [Fedora QA] #330: Blocker Components are not updated when bug is reassigned
by fedora-badges 08 Mar '13

08 Mar '13

#330: Blocker Components are not updated when bug is reassigned ---------------------------------------+----------------------- Reporter: tflink | Owner: mkrizek Type: defect | Status: closed Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 19 Component: Blocker bug tracker page | Version: Resolution: fixed | Keywords: Blocked By: | Blocking: ---------------------------------------+----------------------- Changes (by tflink): * resolution: => fixed * cc: qa-devel@… (added) * status: new => closed Comment: Replying to [comment:2 tflink]: > We think this was fixed with the field length changes from #325 but this needs to be confirmed before the ticket is closed. I've tested this with the current devel version and component changes do trigger an update in the relevant database fields. Please re-open the ticket if this issue re-appears -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/330#comment:3> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 0

Re: [Fedora QA] #314: Bug summaries are not updated
by fedora-badges 08 Mar '13

08 Mar '13

#314: Bug summaries are not updated ---------------------------------------+----------------------- Reporter: kparal | Owner: tflink Type: defect | Status: closed Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 19 Component: Blocker bug tracker page | Version: Resolution: fixed | Keywords: Blocked By: | Blocking: ---------------------------------------+----------------------- Changes (by tflink): * cc: qa-devel@… (added) * resolution: => fixed * status: reopened => closed Comment: I have been unable to reproduce this in the current devel version of the blocker tracking app. It looks like the query was changed to detect summary changes and this bug wasn't updated - closing now. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/314#comment:7> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 0

[Fedora QA] #362: Test day Request for 6/6/13
by fedora-badges 08 Mar '13

08 Mar '13

#362: Test day Request for 6/6/13 --------------------------------------+--------------------- Reporter: dpal | Owner: tflink Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Blocker bug tracker page | Version: Keywords: | Blocked By: Blocking: | --------------------------------------+--------------------- We would like to request a test day on 6/6/13 for the following feature: FreeIPA Two Factor Authentication https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/FreeIPA_Two_Factor_Authentication -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/362> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 2

Re: [Fedora QA] #334: Implement Blocker/FE Proposal Page
by fedora-badges 05 Mar '13

05 Mar '13

#334: Implement Blocker/FE Proposal Page ---------------------------------------+----------------------- Reporter: tflink | Owner: tflink Type: enhancement | Status: closed Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 19 Component: Blocker bug tracker page | Version: Resolution: fixed | Keywords: Blocked By: | Blocking: ---------------------------------------+----------------------- Changes (by tflink): * cc: qa-devel@… (added) * status: new => closed * resolution: => fixed Comment: Code reviewed and merged with develop: 506139dca38ae931e34be9f17cb2f4605d61293f -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/334#comment:1> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 0

Re: Review Request 2: Initial Blocker Review Code
by Martin Krizek 05 Mar '13

05 Mar '13

----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviewboard-tflink.rhcloud.com/r/2/ ----------------------------------------------------------- (Updated March 1, 2013, 6:10 a.m.) Review request for blockerbugs. Changes ------- I've updated the diff with the current changes to the blocker proposal code. There are still some minor issues (mostly with the delay when submitting a blocker and the lack of user integration with bugzilla) but it does work. The diff is slightly broken (see post to qa-devel@ as to why) but the major parts seem to be working. You can see the broken parts of the diff if you download the file or look @ git. Bugs: 334 https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/334 Repository: blockerbugs Description ------- Initial code for blocker submission page Diffs (updated) ----- testing/test_bugchange.py PRE-CREATION sync_db.py 590d80adbf86bc9f7c27a4a8a0d46f5570c303f1 setup.py 32cf5b26caac1aced1dde2f0bf29d94bc2bebe83 initialize.py a6cd0a2766aaf88e8d87a4f72d6721075f6a219d init_f18db.sh c20df66c4b4a8f38ab79a1b61043d26de112f71c conf/blockerbugs.wsgi dcd819f4c4080546c84bd48f604ae6469d70d98a blockerbugs/util/bz_interface.py 2bae79db2d3a1206b7de1cee5f005f137ba2d6f3 blockerbugs/util/bug_sync.py 110fbe983a5cf177c35a9966162d0de23cf98d18 blockerbugs/templates/thanks.html PRE-CREATION blockerbugs/templates/propose_bug.html PRE-CREATION blockerbugs/templates/base_nav.html f3a89798a9dadf297e722c067ad3795a72ebbf74 blockerbugs/controllers/main.py 21bf27ce593a1398b1a08a6a4bcfc1d34146c027 blockerbugs/controllers/forms.py caae0e5b201fc6d85930246c31159ebbbe4f9ab7 blockerbugs/controllers/admin.py 01196b3d9b7284ebcab8bf1db061ad69f2d5f250 blockerbugs/config.py 75cf777d31e7fc3bfe3256704cd349e3ca88c866 blockerbugs/__init__.py cae54ab562f8a17a4473aa0bc58a73dacf5225f9 Diff: http://reviewboard-tflink.rhcloud.com/r/2/diff/ Testing (updated) ------- I've done quite a bit of local testing and there is a staging instance available: https://209.132.184.132/blockerbugs Thanks, Tim Flink

1 6

Problems with code reviews on reviewboard
by Tim Flink 05 Mar '13

05 Mar '13

Recently, we've been having some issues with code reviews on the reviewboard instance I set up. Petr was not able to create a review for a fedora-build-service patch and a review I set up is showing diff errors. I started digging into this yesterday, and it turns out to be a problem with the fedorahosted cgit instance that reviewboard uses to get files to generate the diffs - it's not returning the right file contents. In some cases, it returns blank files. In other cases, it returns 404 errors (what petr was hitting) or HEAD from MASTER instead of the file requested (what I was hitting). After talking with nirik in #fedora-admin, it looks like this might be an issue with the fedorahosted.org setup of cgit because while I can reproduce the issue on freedesktop.org's cgit instance (which is probably using the same redirects), I can't reproduce the problem on the upstream cgit instance [1]. [1] http://git.zx2c4.com/cgit/ I've filed an issue with infra [2] and will update this thread when we know more. However, until this is resolved - code reviews on reviewboard aren't likely to work 100%. [2] https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/3687 Tim

1 1

Re: [Fedora QA] #318: track blockers closed as duplicates to non-blockers
by fedora-badges 04 Mar '13

04 Mar '13

#318: track blockers closed as duplicates to non-blockers ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------- Reporter: kparal | Owner: tflink Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Undetermined Future Component: Blocker bug tracker page | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: Blocked By: | Blocking: ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------- Changes (by tflink): * milestone: => Undetermined Future * cc: qa-devel@… (added) -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/318#comment:1> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 0

Re: [Fedora QA] #323: Add API support to the blocker tracking app
by fedora-badges 04 Mar '13

04 Mar '13

#323: Add API support to the blocker tracking app ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------- Reporter: tflink | Owner: tflink Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: Undetermined Future Component: Blocker bug tracker page | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: Blocked By: | Blocking: ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------- Changes (by tflink): * cc: qa-devel@… (added) * milestone: => Undetermined Future -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/323#comment:1> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 0

Re: [Fedora QA] #356: Blocker Proposal is Slow
by fedora-badges 04 Mar '13

04 Mar '13

#356: Blocker Proposal is Slow ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------- Reporter: tflink | Owner: tflink Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Undetermined Future Component: Blocker bug tracker page | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: Blocked By: | Blocking: ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------- Changes (by tflink): * milestone: Fedora 19 => Undetermined Future * cc: qa-devel@… (added) Comment: I did some digging into this and I don't think it's practical to plan on this for Fedora 19. It would be great but the blocker tracking app wouldn't be the only Fedora-related app that has some slow postings and I think our resources could be better spent elsewhere for now. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/356#comment:1> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 0

Re: [fedora-build-service] #10: image_builder doesn't clean up after itself
by fedora-badges 01 Mar '13

01 Mar '13

#10: image_builder doesn't clean up after itself -----------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: tflink | Owner: pschindl Type: defect | Status: accepted Priority: major | Milestone: Initial Deployment Component: Image Building | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: -----------------------------+-------------------------------- Changes (by pschindl): * status: new => accepted * owner: somebody => pschindl -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-build-service/ticket/10#comment:1> fedora-build-service <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-build-service> A service to build fedora images with a somewhat arbitrary package set from the standard fedora repos or builds from koji.

1 0

Re: Review Request 8: Add Fedora 19 Milestones
by Martin Krizek 01 Mar '13

01 Mar '13

----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviewboard-tflink.rhcloud.com/r/8/ ----------------------------------------------------------- (Updated March 1, 2013, 10:09 a.m.) Status ------ This change has been marked as submitted. Review request for blockerbugs. Bugs: 332 https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/332 Repository: blockerbugs Description ------- Make navigation bar content loaded dynamically Diffs ----- blockerbugs/templates/index.html 17b98b686664754de74158afb4c793e245660690 blockerbugs/templates/base_nav.html f3a89798a9dadf297e722c067ad3795a72ebbf74 blockerbugs/controllers/main.py e7525f8433d74802f7c0cb2d719f0abdc13431c4 Diff: http://reviewboard-tflink.rhcloud.com/r/8/diff/ Testing ------- Thanks, Martin Krizek

1 0

Re: Review Request 8: Add Fedora 19 Milestones
by Martin Krizek 01 Mar '13

01 Mar '13

> On Feb. 26, 2013, 7:15 p.m., Tim Flink wrote: > > Code looks good to me for the most part. I realize that we've talked about g versus session for storing this data before but I'm hitting some minor issues regarding the ability of the menu bars to update. > > > > When I start adding/removing milestones, the only way that the menu bar is updated is if I start a new browser session - this means quitting the browser and re-starting _without_ restoring the previous session. There might be a better way to force a refresh but either way, I'm not so sure about putting the refresh burden on users instead of handling it in the app. > > > > Unfortunately, I can't think of many good ways to make this work well that don't involve an extra database query per request. One way would be to have a statically defined expiration in the session (like 1 day after initial load) and force refresh after that expiration. However, that has its own pitfalls and adds complexity - I'm not convinced this is a good idea. > > > > I'm wondering if it wouldn't be better to go back to what you had initially and use g. It would involve extra database queries but if that becomes a problem, caching would work well to reduce server load - most of the content is relatively static (in the timeframe of sync operations, 30 minutes right now) and caching could be a good way to work around this. > > Martin Krizek wrote: > In general, I agree. However, and please correct me if I am wrong, our use case is to put milestones into db before the testing starts (before the app is actually used by anyone). Then there is a testing period and then there is a testing break during which the session expires. And after the break we put the new milestones into db again. In this scenario I don't see the problem with refreshing the milestones. Or do we add/delete/change milestones during the testing period? Or are we planning to do that? If so, we should use the g object, otherwise, I think we're better off with session. True, the risk of having problems during the testing of a release are relatively small but I'd still rather not have to tell people to quit their browser or delete a cookie when new milestones aren't showing up in their browser. One possible solution would be to hack at permanent sessions so that the lifetime is something like 1 day (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11783025/is-there-an-easy-way-to-make-se…) but honestly, I'm thinking that the use of g would be a better solution right now - postgres is supposed to be good at caching query results and this one shouldn't change all that often - if we end up with performance problems, we can always revisit. The change from g to session isn't much code. - Tim ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviewboard-tflink.rhcloud.com/r/8/#review10 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Feb. 26, 2013, 9:28 a.m., Martin Krizek wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviewboard-tflink.rhcloud.com/r/8/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Feb. 26, 2013, 9:28 a.m.) > > > Review request for blockerbugs. > > > Bugs: 332 > https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/332 > > > Repository: blockerbugs > > > Description > ------- > > Make navigation bar content loaded dynamically > > > Diffs > ----- > > blockerbugs/templates/index.html 17b98b686664754de74158afb4c793e245660690 > blockerbugs/templates/base_nav.html f3a89798a9dadf297e722c067ad3795a72ebbf74 > blockerbugs/controllers/main.py e7525f8433d74802f7c0cb2d719f0abdc13431c4 > > Diff: http://reviewboard-tflink.rhcloud.com/r/8/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Martin Krizek > >

1 0

Re: Review Request 6: Fixing sync to work with new python-bugzilla and new FE naming convention
by Martin Krizek 01 Mar '13

01 Mar '13

----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviewboard-tflink.rhcloud.com/r/6/ ----------------------------------------------------------- (Updated March 1, 2013, 6:08 a.m.) Status ------ This change has been marked as submitted. Review request for blockerbugs. Bugs: 331 https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/331 Repository: blockerbugs Description ------- Refactoring templates, bug sync and database to fit with new FreezeException nomenclature adding alembic upgrade script for db changes updated bug_sync code for python-bugzilla >= 0.8 Diffs ----- testing/testfunc_bugsync.py 719b530187a5e3fff7aba72c6776eecaad32cc40 testing/test_bugsync_extract_information.py 47df0e7cd34406aafb7c27f35944d6cff8cb96f3 setup.py e9fc12082a4d16afe93b04d7b96658715403eccc blockerbugs/util/bug_sync.py a85200dae03630d9407d7b27e235eb13c4a5b4a1 blockerbugs/templates/milestone_stats.html 8ff6bc4470967d7eaef633ef8b9b98330eac198b blockerbugs/templates/milestone_info.html 167dc0b1f5778c75f00e667240d03e8bf817e87a blockerbugs/templates/irc_format.txt a931c077f88cc998e9464b520a5625d7d9cc7e73 blockerbugs/templates/blocker_list.html 79a8a4b008319e80763f66de3ed6e56df89aa6d8 blockerbugs/templates/admin/modify_release.html 548c3d90c95bfe2a90d5d399d020b7bfcbcffc90 blockerbugs/templates/admin/main.html 121e79f4aa4330cc7b364f835ff2fd61178ac842 blockerbugs/templates/admin/add_release.html d396629f5f30787bbf136c163d24f272371cf06f blockerbugs/models/milestone.py cad913446157a15079a519fe0c29831b1635dc1f blockerbugs/models/bug.py dc25f060c470c0ad168e88c981ffe82203ca0d93 blockerbugs/controllers/main.py e7525f8433d74802f7c0cb2d719f0abdc13431c4 blockerbugs/controllers/forms.py 669d78a5030904d4559d6d68af093bd6f096888b blockerbugs/controllers/admin.py a6c8674820d602577363959be7d4eecd608cdf12 alembic/versions/487cb8ccce92_dropping_flask_login.py PRE-CREATION alembic/versions/31a6a2f222b7_changing_nth_and_tra.py PRE-CREATION Diff: http://reviewboard-tflink.rhcloud.com/r/6/diff/ Testing ------- I've done several syncs on both sqlite and postgres dbs and clicked around to make sure that all the templates that _were_ working are still working. Some of the admin pages still have issues but that is orthogonal to the changes here. I did an alembic upgrade of the database with no issues. Thanks, Tim Flink

1 0

Blocker Tracking App Deadlines and Schedules for F19
by Tim Flink 01 Mar '13

01 Mar '13

As we start getting closer to the time where we're all busy testing Fedora 19, it's time to start looking at what we want to get wrapped up before then. Looking at the Fedora 19 schedule [1], we have: 2013-03-12: F19 Branch from Rawhide 2013-04-02: Feature Freeze [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/19/Schedule The way I'm thinking, the drop-dead-date is 2013-04-02. I don't remember a release where we weren't mostly consumed by testing tasks by the freeze date and even though we don't _think_ F19 is going to be a huge problem - that doesn't mean that we won't be busy :). I don't want to find ourselves in a situation where we really should be working on F19 but need to be wrapping up devel/integration work on any of the tools. The way I see it, we have some critical stuff left to do and some more nice-to-have stuff that won't cause too many problems if left unfinished. I've created a list at the end of this mail listing groups of tickets in order of priority. I'm not worried about (1) and (2) on that list. (1) is pretty much done and (2) should be pretty quick. (3) could be a problem but should be workable before F19 branches. That leaves (4) and (5) as the larger items which I don't think _have_ to be done before F19 but it would be really nice if they were done. Martin and I should know more about the likelihood of their completion in the next couple of days. (6) is a bunch of stuff that would be nice to have but I'm not going to lose any sleep if they aren't done in time. They would be great small things to pick up if anyone else is interested, though :) Tim == Critical to Finish Before F19 == 1. Finish in-progress work - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/334 * Implement Blocker/FE Proposal Page - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/332 * Add Fedora 19 Milestones These are either mostly done or close to being done - code reviews have been filed and code should be in develop soon 2. fixing some small bugs reported during F18 - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/314 * Bug summaries are not updated - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/330 * Blocker Components are not updated when a bug is reassigned These bugs were found during the F18 test cycle and shouldn't be too hard to actually get done. Since they were reported by users, the issues were noticed and thus really need to be fixed before F19 testing gets into full swing. 3. packaging and making sure we're able to use SSL for F19 - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/337 * Package Blocker Tracking App for Fedora and EPEL - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/359 * Create Ansible Playbooks for Deployment and Updating Now that we're using FAS logins for blocker proposals, we need to be able to use SSL so that passwords aren't transmitted in the clear. While using a self-signed cert is an option, it is kind of a last resort that decreases the usability of the site. I've been talking to the infra folks and the best way forward is if we can get the tracking app to the point where we are hosted in the production infrastructure. This means that we should be packaged in EPEL and have Ansible scripts for the deployment and updating of the app. I already have the Ansible playbooks mostly written - they mostly need some cleanup before submitting them. I'm not exactly sure how to handle alembic updates with playbooks and the package but I think that's something which could be figured out with packaging. The potential snag here is the CSS - right now that is being compiled from SCSS using sass/compass and the zurb-foundation framework. None of these things are currently packaged for EPEL6 (sass and compass are at least packaged for fedora so unless there are problems with the ruby version in EL6, those shouldn't be difficult). It's possible that CSS could be considered content instead of code which would allow us to continue distributing the compiled css instead of needing to compile it at build time. == Would be VERY nice to have but not absolutely critical for F19 == 4. improving the blocker submission so that it's either not so slow or not vulnerable to refresh during submission - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/356 * Blocker Proposal is Slow I haven't filed any detailed tickets for this yet because while I have ideas on how I want to fix this, I'm not sure if they would be practical or if there is enough time before F19 to actually get them done. 5. Bugzilla auth integration - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/347 * Implement Bugzilla Account Association - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/348 * Store Bugzilla Email Association in Database - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/349 * Implement Bugzilla Email Verification - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/350 * Integration Bugzilla Email Association with Blocker Proposal At the moment, Martin is planning to do this - not sure if it'll be done in time but we're going to be discussing that tomorrow. == Nice to have for F19 but not absolutely critical == 6. misc. cleanup (minifying css and js, reworking templates so that only the js _needed_ is loaded on every page, adding some links) - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/357 * Improve asset management - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/358 * Optimize Template CSS and JS includes - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/333 * Add visible Link to IRC Meeting Prep - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/343 * Add cgit link to Main Page

1 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

qa-devel March 2013