Suggested activities during the pre-F21 lull

Adam Williamson awilliam at
Tue Jan 21 01:49:43 UTC 2014

Hi folks! As a throwaway at the end of the meeting today I mentioned a
few tasks we could be doing during this 'quiet time' between F20 and
F21. People seemed interested, and so I promised to send out a more
detailed version of the list with links and references and stuff. This
(obviously!) isn't a set of orders, and it's not really even a 'top
priority' list, just my little list of ideas for things you could work
on if you're looking to spend some time on Fedora but aren't sure what
to do when we don't have Test Days or validation testing running.

* It's not glamorous or exciting, but it always needs doing: test
updates-testing on the stable releases (F19 and F20) and file feedback.
You can always use a virtual machine to test a release you don't have
installed - you can't check everything in a VM, but you can do a lot of
things, and sometimes you can test stuff in a VM that you wouldn't want
to mess with on your main system. has all the info you
need on doing updates-testing work: if you don't use fedora-easy-karma - - or gooey karma -
stuck in package review ATM, but there's a Copr at
- consider doing so, it'll really help!

* You can always help test Rawhide - the development tree of Fedora, so
right now, the current state of Fedora 21. All the details on Rawhide
are at . Depending on
how brave/experienced you are (and how many forms of backup you have!),
you can even run it in production (the machine I'm typing this on has
been running Rawhide for several weeks now...but I have backups of
everything, webmail to use when Evolution breaks, Xfce to use when GNOME
breaks, a Fedora 20 laptop to use if Rawhide breaks and a Fedora 19
laptop to use if Fedora 20 breaks ;>). If that's a bit too much for you,
you can test the nightly live images from , or run it in a
VM. Once you're actually running Rawhide, file any significant bugs you
encounter just as usual, and if you run into any real showstoppers, you
can propose them as Fedora 21 blockers following the usual process
( ) - the
blocker bug app has not yet been updated for F21 so you can't use that,
but all you have to do is mark the bug as blocking "AlphaBlocker",
"BetaBlocker" or "FinalBlocker". If you see any unusual or unexpected
changes but you're not sure if they're bugs, post about them here (on
test@), it's one of the purposes of the list!

* One thing we never seem to quite do enough of is creating
package-specific test cases: again this isn't highly visible work, but
it is useful to do it. The details on doing it are at (and explains how to
write a test case). If you write some test cases and 'associate' them
with a package, as the SOPs explain, they will be attached to every
Bodhi update for that package, and people doing updates-testing testing
will see your test cases as something they can use to check the package
is working properly. If Bodhi 2.0 ever shows up, we'll be able to use
these test cases in more concrete ways too - you're building up our
resources for the future.

* Of course, we have work to do on improving the release criteria and
validation test cases. Johann is right that introduces some
uncertainty here, but the majority of our validation process covers
stuff that's more than likely going to be in the 'shared base' of the
new 'products', so I don't expect there'll be *too* much
change - we'll probably still be validating the shared base as usual.
I'm trying to do some of this, but it always helps to have more folks.
We came across several pain points in the criteria and test cases during
F20 validation, and it'd be good to resolve some of those. You can
always poke through blocker bug meeting logs to remind yourself of the
issues we came up against - what I've been doing is browsing through - the F20
meetings start from 2013-08-21 - and just skim-reading the HTML full
logs of each meeting; you can easily see where the discussion of each
bug starts from the bolded lines. When the discussion lasts only a few
lines and finishes quick, we probably didn't have any trouble deciding
the status of that bug, so you don't need to worry about it. If the
discussion of a bug goes on for pages and pages, it's a good hint that
that bug was a 'pain point': we might be able to improve our criteria
and/or test cases to make the situation clearer. We welcome submissions
of proposed improvements to the validation process from anyone, there's
no secret club you need to be in to submit ideas! Proposing a new
release criterion or test case is really as simple as writing it down
and mailing it to the list with an explanation - you can do your test
case just as plain text if you don't want to deal with all the wiki
stuff, or you can create it in your personal space on the wiki and link
to it from your proposal email. It's probably a good idea to include the
word 'proposal' and/or 'criteria' and/or 'validation' in the subject (I
tend to search for those 'magic words' when looking through the list
archives for such proposals).

Thanks for all your continued work, everyone!
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net

More information about the test mailing list