test October 2011

test@lists.fedoraproject.org

130 participants
390 discussions

[Fedora QA] #182: I wish to become a tester
by fedora-badges 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

#182: I wish to become a tester -----------------------------------------+---------------------------------- Reporter: pforsell | Owner: Type: proventester request | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Proventester Mentor Request | Version: Keywords: | -----------------------------------------+---------------------------------- = phenomenon = = reason = = recommendation = -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/182> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 2

[Fedora QA] #145: Request to join ProvenTester
by fedora-badges 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

#145: Request to join ProvenTester -----------------------------------------+---------------------------------- Reporter: dbhole | Owner: Type: proventester request | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Proventester Mentor Request | Version: Keywords: | -----------------------------------------+---------------------------------- OpenJDK is a widely used package, and has quarterly security updates (at the very least). While we (devel and qe) team test it, there is no way for us to set a +1 karma as a proven-tester. To that end, I would like to apply for proven tester status. In addition to OpenJDK, this will also allow me to test and set the proper Karma for other packages our team owns. I'd be happy to follow and training guidelines laid out by a Proventester Mentor. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/145> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 3

[Fedora QA] #98: Request for a Mentor
by fedora-badges 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

#98: Request for a Mentor -----------------------------------------+---------------------------------- Reporter: jdulaney | Owner: Type: proventester request | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Proventester Mentor Request | Version: Keywords: | -----------------------------------------+---------------------------------- I would like to now formally request a Proven Tester Mentor. I have been running Fedora since FC1, generally updating every other release (I skipped 9 and went straight to 10). I have several boxes so as to get different hardware involved. Thanks, John H. Dulaney https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Jdulaney -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/98> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 2

[Fedora QA] #60: Devise a better location for critpath.txt
by fedora-badges 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

#60: Devise a better location for critpath.txt -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Reporter: kparal | Owner: Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Wiki | Version: Keywords: | -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- critpath.txt lists critical path packages [1]. Currently it is referenced as {{{ http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/rawhide-<<CURRENT DATE>>/logs/critpath.txt }}} or {{{ http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/rawhide-<<YESTERDAY DATE>>/logs/critpath.txt }}} depending on which page. Similarly for branched releases. This is not optimal. Very often the url just doesn't work. For example at the time of writing critpath.txt on F13 Alpha Release Criteria page [2] references rawhide-20100407/ directory, where critpath.txt is not available. Nor it is available in rawhide-20100406/ directory. Only in rawhide-20100405/ it is finally available. The very page Critical Path Packages [1] references critpath.txt for Branched release, which is available ATM, but also references critpath.txt for Rawhide, which is again not available. Let's imagine other use case - some automated tool must decide whether package in the critical path. It can't rely on path which are constantly changing and sometimes are not available. critpath.txt is created dynamically, so we probably must have the contents created every day or so. But we should devise such mechanism that the location is stable and the file is always available (if new contents fails to create, the old contents is still available). That will also allow third-party tools to rely on it. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Critical_Path_Packages [[BR]] [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_13_Alpha_Release_Criteria -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/60> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 2

[Fedora QA] #236: No qa test for making sure that the boot.iso is hybridised
by fedora-badges 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

#236: No qa test for making sure that the boot.iso is hybridised --------------------+------------------------------------------------------- Reporter: ausil | Owner: adamw Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Trac | Version: Keywords: | --------------------+------------------------------------------------------- = bug description = F-16 alpha shipped witha boot.iso that did not have isohybrid run on it, this means you can not just dd it to a usb drive and boot it. = bug analysis = slipped though as there was no test case = fix recommendation = lorax has been fixed, but we should make sure we cover it in testing. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/236> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 5

[Fedora QA] #170: Request for F15 Power Management test day
by fedora-badges 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

#170: Request for F15 Power Management test day -----------------------------------------+---------------------------------- Reporter: jskarvad | Owner: Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Proventester Mentor Request | Version: Keywords: | -----------------------------------------+---------------------------------- We would like to have the Power Management test day on 2011-03-24 (or maybe later). Such event would help us to test the PM functionality (especially suspend / hibernate and tuned profiles) across wide HW configurations. We are able to prepare detailed test instructions and scripts for test semi-automation. Feature page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/PowerManagementF15 -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/170> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 11

Release criteria proposal: downgrade some kickstart delivery methods from Beta to Final
by Adam Williamson 17 Nov '11

17 Nov '11

Hey, folks. So, currently the Beta criteria state: "The installer must be able to use all kickstart delivery methods" This is probably over-ambitious for Beta. We have some pretty odd kickstart delivery methods: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_File_Path_Ks_Cfg https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_Hd_Device_Path_Ks_Cfg that are only really useful in pretty unusual scenarios. In fact the first of these is broken in F16 Beta and we decided to go ahead and release it anyway (on the basis that we agreed this criterion should be changed, which is why I'm proposing a change now), and the world has not ended. I'd propose at least this much change: for Beta, the criterion should read "The installer must be able to use the HTTP and NFS kickstart delivery methods" as those are the two that are really useful in most situations, and we move "The installer must be able to use all kickstart delivery methods" to be a Final criterion. Thoughts? The Beta criterion is a bit more 'technology-specific' than I usually like to make the criteria, but I don't think we're that likely to discover any exciting new protocols in the foreseeable future, so specifying HTTP and NFS is probably reasonably future-proof. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net

5 6

2011-07-11 @ **15:00 UTC** - Fedora QA Meeting - proposed agenda
by James Laska 16 Nov '11

16 Nov '11

# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting # Date: 2011-07-11 # Time: 15:00 UTC (11:00 EDT, 17:00 CEST) [1] # Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net Greetings testers! Quite a few topics to discuss today. Many of them are quick updates, so I don't anticipate going longer than our time slot. As always, feel free to respond to this mail with additional topics/suggestions/concerns. == Proposed Agenda Topics == https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20110711 1. Desktop duplicate application names 2. Fedora 16 RATS! 3. AutoQA update 4. R^3 - Retrospective recommendation tasks available 5. Cloud SIG Testing update - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/212 6. Security Lab SPIN matrix - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/207 7. Open Discussion - <your topic here> Thanks, James [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto

2 2

pushes to stable during freeze - process question
by Kamil Paral 10 Nov '11

10 Nov '11

Quick question, how do rel-eng guys know which updates are OK to push to stable during freeze and which are not? For example we have the final freeze now. Some packages like this: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2011-14932 are needed to be pushed to stable repo, so they have an exception from the freeze. Blocker and NTH updates have also exception from the freeze. But other packages may be also requesting push to stable and not be eligible for an exception. How do the rel-eng guys know which packages to push and which not to? Thanks.

3 3

Power button in f16?
by Adam Williamson 08 Nov '11

08 Nov '11

On my laptop, pressing the 'power' button in current f16 causes the system to shut down, not suspend - even though the dconf preference says suspend. Anyone else noticed this lately? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net

6 11

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
...
39
Older →

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

test October 2011