[Fedora QA] #296: Fix blocker bug tracker page and replace it with a static HTML page
by fedora-badges
#296: Fix blocker bug tracker page and replace it with a static HTML page
----------------------+------------------------
Reporter: adamwill | Owner: tflink
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 18
Component: Wiki | Version:
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
----------------------+------------------------
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Current_Release_Blockers - which generates
a useful view of blocker bugs from Bugzilla - has been broken since the
recent Bugzilla upgrade. At minimum we need to fix up the script that
generates it, and have it run by something other than jlaska's personal
wiki account. We decided the best approach is probably to make it a
standalone page (hosted on fedoraproject somewhere) rather than a wiki
page; being a wiki page isn't giving us any advantages and just makes
things more complicated.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/296>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
11 years, 2 months
[Fedora QA] #135: Proposed Test Day - TOPIC How about a consideration of the dual boot issues from Fedora 13?
by fedora-badges
#135: Proposed Test Day - TOPIC How about a consideration of the dual boot
issues from Fedora 13?
-----------------------+----------------------------------------------------
Reporter: dramsey | Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 14
Component: Test Day | Version:
Keywords: dual boot |
-----------------------+----------------------------------------------------
How about a consideration of the dual boot issues from Fedora 13?
I remember from the Fedora 13 timeframe, there were dual boot issues.
Would it be advantageous to reconsider a subset of this as well as other
lessons learned from the Fedora 13 which may be a good peruse for
historical impact and reflection.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/135>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
11 years, 2 months
[Fedora QA] #151: Tests consistent with Criterion
by fedora-badges
#151: Tests consistent with Criterion
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
Reporter: rhe | Owner: rhe
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 15
Component: Wiki | Version:
Keywords: retrospective |
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
= problem =
Criteria was kept changing during F-14 test cycle, but some installation
tests didn't update accordingly. On the other hand, the criterion should
be modified to include preupgrade_from_older_release test and new tests
created for F-15.
= enhancement recommendation =
Installation tests need be reviewed and updated to fit for the criterion.
Criterion for preupgrade_from_older_release test is required.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/151>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
11 years, 2 months
[Fedora QA] #289: Howto: debug kernel
by fedora-badges
#289: Howto: debug kernel
--------------------+------------------------
Reporter: kparal | Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 17
Component: Wiki | Version:
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
--------------------+------------------------
I have seen a lot of discussions about kernel with debugging options
enabled in this cycle. The questions repeat itself and I have them
sometimes as well (I tend to forget these information). I think we should
create a wiki page describing:
1. That our current policy is to use debug kernels in all composes prior
to Branched Beta (is that true? maybe just Beta RC1?).
2. The problems that debug kernels may cause (mainly performance
problems).
3. The exceptions in this process (regularly there is a non-debug kernel
built).
4. How to know whether you are currently running a debug kernel (I never
remember this one).
5. How to find latest debug/non-debug kernel in Koji.
6. How to install this kernel from Koji.
Then we can link this page e.g. in our Alpha announcements, so that we
save a lot of question for many people (and maybe a lot of troubles as
well, if they have some troubles and they just don't know about debug
kernels at all).
Good idea? Volunteer?
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/289>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
11 years, 7 months
[Fedora QA] #284: Create advisory installation validation test cases for VirtualBox
by fedora-badges
#284: Create advisory installation validation test cases for VirtualBox
----------------------+------------------
Reporter: adamwill | Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: minor | Milestone:
Component: Wiki | Version:
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
----------------------+------------------
Although kernel team (and the rest of the development team) specifically
don't want to commit to supporting VirtualBox, the practical fact is that
a lot of people like to run Fedora in VirtualBox, and we don't at present
have formal testing in place to find out if it's actually working during
release validation.
In practice, we usually find out about any bugs via people trying it and
then posting their results to test@ or the forums, but this is pretty
rough and ready and it's easy to lose the information. If we add formal
VBox testing to the release validation process we'll probably find out
about VBox fails sooner and do a better job of tracking them for possible
fixes or at least documentation at release time.
So, ideally, we should write test cases for deploying Fedora as a VBox
guest (and possibly using it as a VBox host), and add these to the
installation validation matrix as 'advisory' tests (tests not associated
with Alpha, Beta or Final release phases, and without a corresponding
release criterion).
Dan Mashal, who I hope I've added to CC, is interested in this topic and
may choose to be an awesome rock star and contribute the test cases :)
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/284>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
11 years, 9 months
[Fedora QA] #180: Create Package Specific Test Cases for Design Suite
by fedora-badges
#180: Create Package Specific Test Cases for Design Suite
---------------------------------------------+------------------------------
Reporter: sdz | Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: minor | Milestone: Fedora 15
Component: Wiki | Version:
Keywords: design suite, package test plan |
---------------------------------------------+------------------------------
The Design Suite has been promoted at SXSW and other conferences. We want
to make sure that the included applications are all working and in a good
state. Adam introduced package specific test cases at FUDCon in Tempe. We
should consider creating test cases for the most important tools, such as
blender, gimp, inkscape and shotwell.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/180>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
11 years, 9 months
[Fedora QA] #287: Add Bodhi testing guidelines to Bodhi?
by fedora-badges
#287: Add Bodhi testing guidelines to Bodhi?
-------------------------+------------------
Reporter: kparal | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: Wiki | Version:
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-------------------------+------------------
My thinking process:
1. I was about to test
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/NetworkManager-0.9.3.997-0.7.fc17
2. I realized I don't know what karma to post when NM works in general,
but I haven't tested the linked bug fixes
3. I know we have some karma guidelines somewhere on the wiki
4. I couldn't find the page
5. I found the page at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester#Feedback_procedures after
some time
6. My use case doesn't seem to be mentioned anyway. But that's not
important. The question is - shouldn't we link these instructions directly
from the bodhi page? No one will find it otherwise.
That wiki page is proven tester specific, but the "Feedback procedures"
chapter is not. I think it would be really worth the effort to create a
new wiki page containing just guidelines for correct karma posting and
then ask Bodhi maintainers to link that page directly from the Bodhi page.
I imagine it could be displayed besides the "Add a comment" text are,
named something like "Karma posting guidelines".
What do you think?
Does anyone feel like volunteering for creating this separate wiki page?
I'll gladly create a ticket for Bodhi afterwards.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/287>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
11 years, 9 months
[Fedora QA] #235: request: add tests for new grub2 stage2 device types
by fedora-badges
#235: request: add tests for new grub2 stage2 device types
-----------------------------------------+----------------------------------
Reporter: dlehman | Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: Proventester Mentor Request | Version:
Keywords: |
-----------------------------------------+----------------------------------
= phenomenon =
GRUB2 supports several new md raid levels (0,4,5,6,10) and also lvm
logical volumes as the /boot device. It would be nice to get some testing
coverage for this, including combinations like root on lvm (no separate
/boot) w/ md raid pvs.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/235>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
11 years, 9 months
[Fedora QA] #280: Request for F17 firewalld test day on 2012-03-15
by fedora-badges
#280: Request for F17 firewalld test day on 2012-03-15
-----------------------------------------+------------------
Reporter: twoerner | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: Proventester Mentor Request | Version:
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-----------------------------------------+------------------
I'd like to run a firewalld test day on 2012-03-15. firewalld is the new
firewall solution in Fedora with network zones support.
The tests should cover interaction with NetworkManager, libvirt and
printer configuration/discovery. Maybe more tests are possible for other
projects.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/280>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
11 years, 9 months