2010-04-26 @ ** 15:00 UTC ** - Fedora QA meeting agenda

[James Laska]

# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting
# Date: 2010-04-26
# Time: 15:00 UTC (11:00 EDT, 17:00 CET) [1]
# Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net 

Greetings gang,

It's that time again.  Dust off your IRC skills and get ready for
another gathering of QA minds!  Unless there are other topic
suggestions, I recommend we spend our precious meeting time reviewing
current activities.

= Proposed Agenda =

     1. Fedora 13 RC test status
              * upcoming test events and test days
              * recent test changes
     2. Proventesters check-in
     3. Package Acceptance Test Plan check-in
     4. AutoQA check-in
     5. Open discussion - <Your topic here>

Thanks,
James

[1] To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto

2010-04-26 @ ** 15:00 UTC ** - Fedora QA meeting recap

[James Laska]

As always, meeting minutes and IRC transcript available at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20100426

= Attendees =

People present (lines said):

      * jlaska (91)
      * kparal (37)
      * jeff_hann (9)
      * damNageHack (8)
      * zodbot (4)
      * jskladan (3)
      * lmacken (3)
      * Viking-Ice (1)

Regrets:
      * wwoods
      * adamwill
      * liam
      * rhe

= Agenda =
      * Proposed meeting agenda -
        http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2010-April/090413.html
      * MeetBot summary -
       
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2010-04-26/fedora-qa.2010...

== Previous meeting follow-up ==

      * jlaska + fenris02 to review whether F-13-Beta is an option for
        boot.fedoraproject.org
              * Already completed by the infrastructure team, yay
                infrastructure!
      * adamw + jlaska - Bodhi QA workflow status check-in
              * lmacken organizing existing tickets into Bodhi-2.0 TRAC
                roadmap (see
                https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/milestone/2.0).  Expects
                to complete in next few weeks.
      * See agenda below for additional follow-up items included in
        specific topics

== Fedora 13 RC test status ==

Upcoming test milestones:

      * 2010-04-16 - Pre-RC Branched Acceptance Test Plan -- DELAYED,
        INPROGRESS
      * 2010-04-23 - Final Blocker Meeting (f13blocker) #2
       
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-bugzappers/2010-04-23/fedora-bugz...
      * 2010-04-29 - Test 'Final' Test Compose
      * 2010-04-30 - Final Blocker Meeting (f13blocker) #3
      * 2010-05-05 - Final Blocker Meeting (f13blocker) #4
      * 2010-05-06 - Test 'Final' RC

Upcoming test days:
      * 2010-04-29 -
        https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2010-04-29_Preupgrade

Recent test changes:
      * Adding i18n support to installation test plan (see
        https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/63)

== Proventesters check-in ==

      * maxamillion - send proventester draft to test(a)l.fp.org for final
        review (see
        http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2010-April/090252.html)
      * maxamillion - Requested new proventester FAS group (see
        https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/2114)
      * The team discussed possible next steps, including ...
              * Recommending that current members of the 'qa' group ...
                apply to 'proventesters'
              * Document exact criteria needed for proventesters
              * Provide a TRAC ticket template for mentor requests (for
                sample, see similar
                https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/newtplticket)

== Package Acceptance Test Plan check-in ==

      * Kparal sent request for final review at
        http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2010-April/090287.html
      * If no additional feedback, test plan will be finalized this week
      * Next steps ...
              * Remove ''draft'' status
              * Document each test case (see
                [https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/62)

== AutoQA check-in ==

There has been a lot of AutoQA activities in recent weeks, jlaska asked
the group to walk through some highlights.  

      * Kparal provided some updates from jskladan on the results
        database efforts..
              * First draft of implementing the resultsdb API
              * Test suite for resultsdb API created
      * For any other updates, join autoqa-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org

2010-04-26 @ ** 15:00 UTC ** - Fedora QA meeting recap

[James Laska]

maxamillion caught me on IRC and we discussed this a bit further.

On Mon, 2010-04-26 at 12:47 -0400, James Laska wrote:
>  == Proventesters check-in ==
>  
>        * maxamillion - send proventester draft to test(a)l.fp.org for
>  final
>          review (see
>  
>  http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2010-April/090252.html)
>        * maxamillion - Requested new proventester FAS group (see
>          https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/2114) 
The group appears to be created, thanks maxamillion and ricky!

>        * The team discussed possible next steps, including ...
>                * Recommending that current members of the 'qa'
>  group ... 
I'm asking on #fedora-admin if it's easy to script/batch move existing
approved 'qa' group members into 'proventesters'.  Once we have the
current critpath approvers migrated into 'proventesters', I'll ask
lmacken to update bodhi.

>                  apply to 'proventesters'
>                * Document exact criteria needed for proventesters 
Will leave this as a discussion topic next week.  The open questions for
me are ...

     1. What are our expectations for proventesters?  Kamil's package
        update test plan [1] seems like a great start.  What other
        guidance can we give proventesters?  I'd like to avoid saying,
        "please just test stuff"
     2. How to determine whether someone who is requesting proventesters
        membership has the right stuff?  Can we document the criteria
        that will be used?  Bugzilla stats (new bugs, traiged bugs),
        bodhi karma supplied, mailing list contributions ...

>                * Provide a TRAC ticket template for mentor requests
>  (for sample, see similar
>  
>  https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/newtplticket)  
mmcgrath showed me the special TRAC sauce needed to enable this TRAC
plugin.  So we can provide a template for new tickets is desired. 

Thanks,
James

[1]
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Kparal/Proposal:Package_update_accept...

2010-04-26 @ ** 15:00 UTC ** - Fedora QA meeting recap

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2010-04-27 at 16:52 -0400, James Laska wrote:

>  Will leave this as a discussion topic next week.  The open questions
> for
>  me are ...
>  
>       1. What are our expectations for proventesters?  Kamil's package
>          update test plan [1] seems like a great start.  What other
>          guidance can we give proventesters?  I'd like to avoid saying,
>          "please just test stuff"
>       2. How to determine whether someone who is requesting proventesters
>          membership has the right stuff?  Can we document the criteria
>          that will be used?  Bugzilla stats (new bugs, traiged bugs),
>          bodhi karma supplied, mailing list contributions ... 
I tend to approach this kind of thing quite liberally; I don't think
it's worth sweating too hard about rejecting people, usually I consider
the group as a tool for smoothing out the process if problems appear.
I'd broadly expect to approve most people who apply, and the group
membership acts as a check on their work; if we find someone is being
malicious (or, unlikely, just really bad and not able to improve their
work), we can always take them out of the group again.

In general I reckon anyone who has the motivation to read the
instructions through and apply to the group probably is going to be
amenable to working co-operatively with the rest of the group and
working in line with whatever procedures we agree, which is all we
really require.

But that's just my approach, there are others :)
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

2010-04-26 @ ** 15:00 UTC ** - Fedora QA meeting recap

[Adam Miller]

On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Tue, 2010-04-27 at 16:52 -0400, James Laska wrote:
>
> > Will leave this as a discussion topic next week.  The open questions for
> > me are ...
> >
> >      1. What are our expectations for proventesters?  Kamil's package
> >         update test plan [1] seems like a great start.  What other
> >         guidance can we give proventesters?  I'd like to avoid saying,
> >         "please just test stuff"
> >      2. How to determine whether someone who is requesting proventesters
> >         membership has the right stuff?  Can we document the criteria
> >         that will be used?  Bugzilla stats (new bugs, traiged bugs),
> >         bodhi karma supplied, mailing list contributions ...
>
>  I tend to approach this kind of thing quite liberally; I don't think
>  it's worth sweating too hard about rejecting people, usually I consider
>  the group as a tool for smoothing out the process if problems appear.
>  I'd broadly expect to approve most people who apply, and the group
>  membership acts as a check on their work; if we find someone is being
>  malicious (or, unlikely, just really bad and not able to improve their
>  work), we can always take them out of the group again.
>
>  In general I reckon anyone who has the motivation to read the
>  instructions through and apply to the group probably is going to be
>  amenable to working co-operatively with the rest of the group and
>  working in line with whatever procedures we agree, which is all we
>  really require.
>
>  But that's just my approach, there are others :)
>  --
>  Adam Williamson
>  Fedora QA Community Monkey
>  IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
>  http://www.happyassassin.net
>
>  --
>  test mailing list
>  test(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  To unsubscribe:
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
>  
I actually agree with your take on this quite a bit, I don't so much
want the group membership prerequisites to be a hindering factor but
more of a path of guidance for new testers to get involved and have a
sense of direction on "where to go from $here" for many values of
$here.

I do however think there should be some level of review for
membership, but I don't generally think people will apply for
proventesters until they've been working on testing the distro for a
while and have a good footing on the generally day to day on goings of
QA so I don't imagine there will ever be an issue where we would have
to turn someone down (or I hope we wouldn't have to).

-AdamM

P.S. - Apologies for missing the meeting, course load is crazy since
the semester is wrapping up

-- 
http://maxamillion.googlepages.com
---------------------------------------------------------
()  ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   - against proprietary attachments