16:01:18 <adamw> #startmeeting 2009-11-16 Fedora QA meeting
16:01:19 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Nov 16 16:01:18 2009 UTC.  The chair is adamw. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:01:19 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:01:25 <adamw> #topic gathering people
16:01:26 <adamw> who's here?
16:01:32 * Oxf13 
16:01:35 * jlaska is half here
16:01:47 * kparal is here
16:01:49 <adamw> do we get to pick which half?
16:02:04 <jlaska> adamw: why not
16:02:27 <adamw> we'll take the top
16:02:44 <jlaska> hehe
16:02:45 <adamw> do we have a wwoods?
16:03:09 * Viking-Ice 50% here..
16:03:22 <wwoods> you have nine and a half wwoodses
16:03:27 <adamw> hey viking
16:03:34 <adamw> oh wow, it's an army
16:03:37 <wwoods> more wwoods than you know what to do with
16:03:53 <Viking-Ice> .com
16:04:09 <adamw> alrighty
16:04:19 <adamw> #topic previous meeting follow-up
16:04:23 <adamw> so yeah, uh
16:04:28 <adamw> i'm winging this
16:04:34 <adamw> just a sec
16:04:47 <jlaska> adamw: apologies ... don't have any action items from last week ... pulling in the previous meeting tasks
16:05:02 <adamw> don't see any
16:05:02 <jlaska> we have a few that continue to carry over. .. not sure if we want to continue that ... or drop them from the list
16:05:11 <adamw> oh iswym
16:05:18 <adamw> yeah we should follow up on 2009-11-02
16:05:27 * jlaska looking at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20091116
16:05:38 <adamw> point of order, btw: shouldn't that have been wwwwwwwwwvoods?
16:06:36 <Viking-Ice> Uhum Still "investigating" need to get of my lazy as and write the dam test case..
16:06:41 <wwoods> adamw: ha! good point. I'll file a bug.
16:06:55 <adamw> still havn't heard from milos on the ftbfs topic
16:07:02 <adamw> i think we can stop carrying that one unless he comes back with it
16:07:17 <jlaska> sorry ... wrong channel
16:07:37 <jlaska> adamw: okay, sounds good, I'll drop from next weeks agenda
16:07:58 <adamw> not sure what was meant by 'preupgrade test cases'
16:08:03 <jlaska> I've got a link ...
16:08:40 <adamw> #agreed milos jacubicek's ftbfs proposal is tabled until he comes back with more
16:08:46 <jlaska> just wanted to follow-up from the FESCO meeting ... I've asked Hurry to take a peak at ensuring the existing preupgrade tests will capture the failure case identified this release https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/30
16:09:11 <wwoods> the existing preupgrade test cases didn't account for the fact that *most* users running preupgrade will have 3 kernel packages installed
16:09:28 <jlaska> wwoods: yeah
16:09:41 <adamw> ah, yeah, that. we should fix that.
16:09:59 <jlaska> Hurry and Kamil have some feedbackin the ticket now, I'll be replying later todya
16:10:02 <jlaska> today
16:10:08 <adamw> while we're at it, can we think of any other things real-world preupgrade usage would be likely to hit that we wouldn't recreate from a clean install?
16:10:18 <jlaska> of course ... others are welcome to
16:10:19 <adamw> (that we care about. so, not rpmfusion stuff.)
16:10:36 <jlaska> adamw: good topic ... can we move that down to the post-mortem prep?
16:10:53 <adamw> I'M RUNNING THIS MEETING DAMNIT! *froths at mouth*
16:10:56 <adamw> i mean, uh, yes of course :)
16:11:10 <jlaska> adamw: :)
16:11:33 <adamw> in that case...we're done with follow-up I guess
16:11:44 <adamw> did we miss anything anyone wanted to follow-up on from the last two weeks?
16:12:31 <adamw> ok
16:12:38 <adamw> #topic fedora 12: coming soon
16:12:51 <kparal> tomorrow, right?
16:12:56 <adamw> so, yeah, stickster asked me to let everyone know that since fedora 12 has no bugs, we're all fired
16:13:06 <kparal> :)
16:13:11 <adamw> it's been a blast, everyone
16:13:17 <adamw> :)
16:13:20 <adamw> yeah, tomorrow
16:13:26 <wwoods> hah. so let's delete this https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F12_bugs page then
16:13:39 <adamw> yeah, that thing's completely wrong, i dunno what idiot wrotei t
16:13:56 <adamw> so yep, that's the common bugs page
16:14:05 <adamw> in case anyone isn't aware of the idea by now, we put common bugs onto it
16:14:30 <adamw> there's quite a lot of things that still need to be added
16:14:36 <adamw> jlaska, could you make with the Magic List?
16:14:47 <jlaska> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20091116#Common_F12_Bugs
16:14:52 <jlaska> 22 bugs on the list
16:15:01 <adamw> shiny
16:15:06 <jlaska> I was hoping we could discuss a method to divide up the list
16:15:20 <jlaska> I'm happy to take the installer issues ... if people want to divide by component
16:15:37 <jlaska> there's too much on the list for just adamw to complete for tomorrow
16:15:45 <adamw> note that X-related ones may occasionally be actually already on the page - matej has been cleaning out whiteboard sections and shortening the commonbugs links as he thinks they're too long, so we may have to come up with a new standard and refine jlaska's search
16:15:48 <jlaska> so was curious if folks were interesting in pitching in a bug or 2
16:16:10 <adamw> well i wouldn't want to take anyone off other vital work
16:16:21 <adamw> e.g. if wwoods is still fixing up preupgrade that should take priority
16:16:28 <adamw> i could get through that list if necessary
16:16:36 <wwoods> so in the latest preupgrade update I referenced http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PreUpgrade
16:17:16 <jlaska> wwoods: so that's the page we should link to from common_F12_Bugs as well?
16:17:18 <wwoods> so either that page needs a link to the commonbugs entry for F12 *or* the commonbugs entry for F12 needs to link to the part of that page that describes some ways to clean up /boot
16:17:23 <wwoods> your call
16:17:24 * jlaska nods
16:17:35 <wwoods> but yeah that needs to happen as soon as possible
16:17:42 <adamw> i, uh, don't see anything about /boot there?
16:18:25 <wwoods> that's the problem.
16:18:35 <jlaska> wwoods: I'd like to get my feet wet on Common_F12_Bugs ... I'll be happy to take that for after the meeting and send you a draft for comments
16:18:39 <adamw> oh, okay. gotcha :)
16:18:56 <wwoods> bug 530541 is probably the thing to examine
16:18:57 <buggbot> Bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=530541 medium, low, ---, skvidal, ON_QA, Free space check on /boot not thorough enough
16:19:03 <wwoods> jlaska: sounds good
16:19:31 <jlaska> #action jlaska will propose Common_F12_Bugs after meeting for bug#530541
16:19:56 <jlaska> I'll also get the RAID one while I'm at it
16:20:02 <jlaska> bug#533545
16:20:03 <buggbot> Bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=533545 high, low, ---, skvidal, NEW, Fedora 11 preupgrade to F12/rawhide destroys grub on raid (warning about grub on RAID not displayed)
16:21:27 <adamw> so, also on the list is cleaning F12Blocker
16:21:28 <wwoods> jlaska: in theory that should be fixed, but the fact that /boot-RAID requires a wired network connection should be documented, yeah
16:21:38 <jlaska> wwoods: okay
16:22:03 <adamw> only https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533621 remains on the blocker list
16:22:04 <buggbot> Bug 533621: high, low, ---, rvykydal, ASSIGNED, Can't Boot After F12 b2 DVD Upgrade on sytem with RAID1 /boot
16:22:40 <adamw> and we should drop it, as we agreed it wasn't a blocker (it's actually not about RAID /boot but about drive order changing between install and upgrade
16:22:56 <adamw> so shall we go ahead and drop it from the list?
16:23:37 <jlaska> are we seeing a lot of +1 's on that issue?
16:23:47 <adamw> not obviously
16:23:52 <jlaska> okay
16:24:01 <adamw> there may be other bugs filed which are actually dupes of it, but then i'd expect anaconda triage to be catching them, they usually do
16:24:07 <jlaska> I guess it's going off the list, since we're not respinning
16:24:12 <adamw> heh
16:24:23 <jlaska> is there something to document here?
16:25:23 <adamw> sure, we can throw in a commonbugs notice based on radek's most recent comment
16:26:10 <jlaska> oh it's tagged already
16:26:12 <jlaska> let's drop it
16:26:19 <adamw> k
16:26:27 <adamw> dropped
16:26:49 <adamw> now the only remaining bugs on the list are themselves metabugs: so do we drop 'em from the dependencies and close f12blocker?
16:27:09 <jlaska> hmmm ... I don't recall
16:27:21 <jlaska> is that one of the release actions for bugzappers
16:27:25 <wwoods> move to F13Blocker?
16:27:28 <kparal> should they be moved to f13blocker?
16:27:31 <kparal> ouch
16:27:37 <adamw> wwoods wins
16:27:50 <adamw> seems logical
16:28:10 <kparal> or F13Alpha?
16:28:53 <adamw> no, the alpha blocker list does not necessarily contain everything on the final release blocker list
16:29:59 * jlaska now back to 100% for qa meeting
16:30:16 <adamw> trackers do seem to be listed under bugzappers housekeeping
16:30:17 <adamw> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Trackers
16:30:25 <adamw> so i'll probably punt that to tomorrow's bugzappers meeting
16:30:33 <adamw> and we'll do the cleanup there
16:30:47 <wwoods> typically in the past we just moved everything to the blocker/target for the next release
16:31:10 <wwoods> but yeah, the bugzappers will discuss/decide on that
16:31:29 <jlaska> #info discuss plan for F12 tracking bugs in Tuesday bugzapper meeting
16:31:51 <adamw> jlaska: you wanna take over now? it's your agenda
16:32:19 <jlaska> adamw: sure ... but I'll need prodding to move things along :)
16:32:24 <adamw> #chair jlaska
16:32:24 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw jlaska
16:32:25 <jlaska> so we don't keep kparal too late!
16:32:27 <adamw> go for it
16:32:38 <adamw> onto 'qa retrospective heads up'
16:33:06 <jlaska> Just a heads up kind of topic
16:33:22 <jlaska> there may be a release-wide retrospective meeting
16:33:29 <kparal> kparal: I won't be late. I am attending Caribbean night tonight :)
16:33:40 <jlaska> kparal: oh that's right :)
16:33:59 <jlaska> so ... I wanted to more just get the brains moving around what worked and what didn't for F-12
16:34:07 <jlaska> you may recall we did this for F-11, and previous releases
16:34:19 <jlaska> I was planning to kick this off to the list tomorrow inviting comments
16:34:25 <jlaska> for discussion in next weeks meeting
16:34:52 <jlaska> are there any thoughts to share on a good method for collecting the feedback for discussion next week?
16:35:18 <jlaska> Ideally, I'd like to get 1-2 things that people thought went well, along with 1-2 things that need improvement ... from each of us
16:35:28 <jlaska> and of course from folks who don't regularly attend the meeting
16:35:55 <jlaska> I know that more issues will surface as bug reports come in from F-12 ... but I also wanted to do this soon after release so things are still fresh in your minds
16:36:15 <kparal> we can sum it up on some wiki page and copy comments from mailing list there so they won't get lost
16:36:34 <jlaska> kparal: good tip, we did that with the F-11 test day survey ... I can try that again for this
16:37:27 <jlaska> okay ... well, I'd like to collect and use this feedback to build some common goals for F-13
16:37:43 <jlaska> so if folks have thoughts on a good approach to solicit feedback, please catch me after the meeting
16:38:17 <jlaska> #action jlaska to send request for retrospective feedback to fedora-test-list@
16:38:37 <jlaska> okay ... it's that time again ...
16:38:53 <jlaska> #topic AutoQA update - wwoods
16:39:13 <jlaska> wwoods: you want to start things off ... and then we'll jump over to kparal after
16:39:23 <wwoods> haven't really had a lot of time for autoqa stuff in the past week because of preupgrade, but
16:39:42 <wwoods> we're trying to get the post-koji-build hook finalized and tested so that we can start running post-build tests
16:39:43 * jlaska looks at the preupgrade elephant
16:40:05 <wwoods> we've got the code written and a test system ready, just need some free time
16:40:14 <wwoods> I also talked with the rel-eng guys about how we can prevent broken deps in the repos
16:40:27 <wwoods> we identified the need for a post-bodhi-update hook
16:40:49 <lmacken> bodhi v2.0 will have it :)
16:41:04 <wwoods> and talked about writing a test that checks added/dropped/changed dependencies against known requirements in the public repo(s)
16:41:51 <lmacken> wwoods: by 'hook' do you mean 'AMQP message/QMF event'?
16:42:00 <wwoods> really the only forward progress last week was a couple of issues with the post-koji-build stuff that kparal found
16:42:03 <lmacken> because bodhi 2 will be plugin driven, but also AMQP integrated
16:42:19 <wwoods> lmacken: maybe later, yes, but at the moment we're using the simplest possible watcher scripts
16:42:32 <wwoods> so whatever exists now - polling an RPC / RSS feed / whatever
16:42:38 <wwoods> is what the initial design will use
16:43:37 <wwoods> getting the watcher working ASAP allows us to start writing the hook and tests immediately
16:43:52 <wwoods> and later we can replace the watcher with a nice messagebus listener
16:44:03 <lmacken> Moksha comes with an AMQP
16:44:07 <lmacken> message consumer API :)
16:44:15 <wwoods> that's cool, but I need to pick your brain about what bodhi provides today
16:44:26 <lmacken> in it's current state, for post-update hooks?
16:44:30 <lmacken> nothing.
16:44:32 <lmacken> RSS feeds
16:44:57 <wwoods> okay - we'll write a watcher script that polls the feed and launches tests when new items appear
16:45:06 <lmacken> ok, cool.
16:45:11 <wwoods> that's how all the other watchers currently work.
16:45:21 <wwoods> inelegant but JFDI-compliant
16:45:25 <jlaska> wwoods: you need a theme for these ....
16:45:28 <jlaska> bingo JFDI :)
16:46:24 <wwoods> anyway I *really* want to get this preupgrade stuff cleared up so that we can have some time to work on post-build tests
16:46:36 <wwoods> wanna be able to talk to packagers/devs about that at FUDCon
16:46:46 <jlaska> wwoods: are there aspects of the koji watcher that kparal can assist with ... if it relates to rpmguard or package sanity?
16:46:58 <wwoods> time is running short so probably it'll be a discussion about design rather than a demo of a prototype
16:47:54 <wwoods> kparal's suggestion about having autoqa have a way to run tests locally is probably the best path forward
16:48:17 <wwoods> once that's written we can make sure rpmguard works as expected *in parallel* with setting up the watcher on the autotest host
16:48:43 <kparal> perfect
16:49:43 <wwoods> so: 1) wwoods adds --local flag to autoqa, 2+3) polish rpmguard and get watcher working, 4) test-enable rpmguard "in production" (i.e. for all new builds, sending out public notices, etc)
16:49:52 <wwoods> that's the basic plan, I think
16:50:08 <wwoods> but item 0) is: fix preupgrade for F12
16:50:24 <kparal> 5) fix lots of issue we ran into
16:50:30 <kparal> *issues
16:50:34 <jlaska> kparal: 6) success
16:50:42 <adamw> 7) profit?
16:50:51 <kparal> nope, world domination
16:50:55 <jlaska> aha
16:51:08 <kparal> so, some updates from me? :)
16:51:16 <jlaska> wwoods: anything else on your end?
16:51:19 <wwoods> nope! kparal: go for it
16:51:23 <jlaska> #topic AutoQA update - kparal
16:51:35 <kparal> Well, I have sent a few patches for the autoqa, as wwoods noted. You can see them in autoqa-devel list.
16:51:52 <kparal> I have also posted a proposal how to make test development easier for new developers: https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/autoqa-devel/2009-November/000018.html
16:52:03 <kparal> Out of that document jlaska has drafted an AutoQA Use Cases on the wiki: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/AutoQA_Use_Cases
16:52:09 <kparal> If you have some suggestion, please contribute.
16:52:29 <kparal> The autoqa-devel list is being used more and more I would say, so if anyone is interested in autoqa development, subscribe. James also proposed that our Trac ticket changes could be sent to autoqa-devel to keep people in loop, let's see what they say.
16:52:57 <jlaska> wasn't sure ... I could see how it might be noise for some folks
16:53:09 <jlaska> but if it's helpful, it's an easy change to make
16:53:21 <kparal> hopefully they will tell us
16:54:08 <kparal> so that's it for this week, but after wwoods merges his work back to master, be prepared for more :)
16:54:34 <jlaska> kparal: looking forward to it!
16:55:05 <jlaska> #topic AutoQA update - misc
16:55:18 <jlaska> I had an extra bullet here for some misc autoqa stuff
16:55:28 <jlaska> some of which was already mentioned, so I'll be brief
16:55:45 <jlaska> #info Package autotest - https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/9
16:56:12 <jlaska> thanks to kparal for help testing the updated packages, I think I'm happy with where things are.  They don't fully pass rpmlint at this point, but that's not something I understood as a goal for this first phase
16:56:31 <jlaska> I'm planning to catch up w/ Oxf13 or mmcgrath this week for guidance on how to get those updated packages into fedora-infra yum repo
16:56:45 <jlaska> #info Packaging autoqa - https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/3
16:57:03 <jlaska> No new updates on that front ... I'll revisit this once wwoods is happy with the big changes in the private branch
16:57:18 <jlaska> it basically works in current git repo ... so not expecting surprises
16:57:27 <jlaska> #info AutoQA Use cases draft - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/AutoQA_Use_Cases
16:57:35 <jlaska> This last point kparal noted above
16:57:57 <kparal> sorry for stealing :)
16:58:05 <jlaska> not at all, thanks for bringing it up
16:58:14 <jlaska> I thought this might help shape the discussion for what tasks need completing for the upcoming FUDCon discussion
16:58:45 <jlaska> kparal's patch around running autoqa locally helped flesh this out for me.
16:58:59 <jlaska> in that we may not have fully outlined how we expect people to interact (or not interact) with the system
16:59:19 <jlaska> so I'll be trying to add more data points and the poking kparal and wwoods for guidance on what I'm missing
16:59:28 <jlaska> okay ... let's move to open discussion
16:59:38 <jlaska> #topic Open discussion - <your topic here>
16:59:49 <jlaska> quick 15 seconds and we'll have a <= 1hr meeting
16:59:50 <jlaska> :)
16:59:58 <adamw> nada!
17:00:00 <jlaska> any topics not covered in the agenda today?
17:00:04 <Viking-Ice> Fedora no longer runs on the number one supercomputer in the world
17:00:20 <Viking-Ice> updated https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Is_Fedora_For_Me accordingly
17:00:43 <Viking-Ice> Jaguar kicked Roadrunner to second place http://www.top500.org/lists/2009/11
17:00:50 <kparal> interesting
17:00:57 <jlaska> heh, "the number two supercomputer"
17:01:26 <jlaska> unless there are any other topics ... I'll close out the meeting in 60 seconds
17:01:28 <Viking-Ice> Jaguar runs Cray Linux Environment encase ye are wondering..
17:02:40 <jlaska> Alrighty gang ... folks can keep discussing on #fedora-qa or the list of course
17:02:51 <jlaska> but we'll call it a wrap for today
17:02:59 <jlaska> thanks for your time and adamw for kicking things off
17:03:05 <jlaska> #endmeeting