16:00:41 <jlaska> #startmeeting Fedora QA Meeting
16:00:41 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Jan 18 16:00:41 2010 UTC.  The chair is jlaska. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:41 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:00:47 <jlaska> #meetingname qa
16:00:47 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'qa'
16:00:52 <wwoods> meeting powers go!
16:01:07 <jlaska> queue the robot sounds
16:01:10 <jlaska> #topic gathering
16:01:12 * kparal is here
16:01:20 <jlaska> wwoods: kparal: howdy
16:01:35 <jlaska> anyone else primed and ready for another edition of the QA meeting?
16:01:47 * tk009 
16:01:56 <adamw> morning
16:02:01 <jlaska> tk009: adamw hi there
16:02:15 <adamw> sorry, /me is tweaking with stuff again
16:02:45 <jlaska> not sure if Viking-Ice or maxamillion are around too
16:02:52 * Viking-Ice here
16:02:59 <jlaska> Viking-Ice: oh good, welcome!
16:03:57 <jlaska> okay, I put a ping out to Adam Miller, but I think he might be busy at the moment
16:04:01 <jlaska> so let's get started ...
16:04:13 <jlaska> Working off the agenda here http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2010-January/088008.html
16:04:20 <jlaska> #topic Previous meeting follow-up
16:04:40 <jlaska> #info maxamillion bring back conversation about Xfce 4.8 updato on xfce@lists.fp.o and inform about conclusion
16:05:06 <jlaska> I don't have any updates on this, anyone else?  I'll leave it on the list until we get a chance to sync up with Adam M.
16:05:43 <jlaska> moving on
16:05:46 <jlaska> #info Viking-Ice write lxde tests and find a date for the test day
16:06:05 <jlaska> Viking-Ice: any updates on definingsome LXDE tests for a possible test day?
16:06:19 <Viking-Ice> Not really looking at it..
16:06:27 <Viking-Ice> Created ticket in QA
16:06:46 <Viking-Ice> [Fedora QA] #46: Write Test cases for LXDE components.
16:06:58 <Viking-Ice> To keep track will update there as thing progress..
16:07:18 <jlaska> okay thanks, lemme add that to the 'draft' test day schedule too (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Talk:QA/Fedora_13_test_days)
16:07:26 <Viking-Ice> Ok
16:07:53 <jlaska> Viking-Ice: thanks for the update
16:08:09 <jlaska> next up ....
16:08:13 <jlaska> #info  adamw and rhe to discuss ways to add install testing as a QA activity
16:08:32 <jlaska> hopefully rhe is sleeping, adamw ... sounds like you two made some progress?
16:08:32 <adamw> well, rhe's not around, so i'll do it
16:08:49 <adamw> rui did, i was too busy playing around with shiny shiny toys. =)
16:09:06 <adamw> rui drafted an  installation testing page:
16:09:13 <adamw> #link lxde fedora list
16:09:15 <adamw> grr!
16:09:18 <adamw> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Installation_Test
16:09:23 <adamw> stupid paste buffers
16:09:38 <adamw> the idea is to have that big explanatory page, and a bit in the 'joining' page which would link to it
16:10:04 <adamw> I wondered if the big page should merge with https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Fedora_12_Install_Test_Plan in some way; rui thinks not at present
16:10:08 <jlaska> #info the idea is to have that big explanatory page, and a bit in the 'joining' page which would link to it
16:10:39 <adamw> i'm going to take some time today to have a look at both pages and see whether I should disagree some more =), do a bit of a proofread, and come up with a draft for the bit to be added to the Joining page
16:11:08 <jlaska> adamw: I can see the drive to avoid duplicate content.  Hopefully we can do that while preserving the concept of a 'test plan'
16:11:25 <adamw> ayup
16:11:28 <jlaska> rather ... while addressing the same issues that the test plan addresses
16:11:38 <jlaska> whether it takes a different form or not
16:11:48 <jlaska> cool, nice update
16:12:04 <jlaska> next up ...
16:12:09 <jlaska> #info jlaska to reach out to beland for guidance/ideas on how to document the process (or point to existing documentation) for how bugs are noted (common_bugs, release notes, install guide etc...) How to determine which bugs land in which place?
16:12:51 <jlaska> another week and I've not kicked off this small task :(  I'll prioritize this for today and see if beland and awilliam have some thoughts as to whether there are any ideas for improvement here
16:13:16 <jlaska> #action jlaska - reach out to beland for guidance/ideas on how to document the process for how bugs bubble through different release documents
16:13:36 <jlaska> cwickert: perfect timeing
16:13:37 <jlaska> timing
16:13:53 <jlaska> cwickert: there's a previous meeting note to follow-up on ...
16:13:57 <jlaska> #info cwickert to file an infrastruture ticket for the lxde mailing list
16:14:09 <jlaska> did you have any updates you wanted to share?
16:15:27 <jlaska> okay, we can come back to that later
16:15:28 <cwickert> jlaska: can be closed
16:15:36 <jlaska> cwickert: ah okay, thanks
16:15:39 <cwickert> nirik fixed it
16:15:44 <jlaska> what's the new list?
16:15:59 <cwickert> lxde@lists.fpo
16:16:03 <jlaska> #link https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/lxde
16:16:08 <jlaska> nice, thanks
16:16:21 <jlaska> alright, moving along ...
16:16:23 <jlaska> #topic Security Policy Update
16:16:32 <jlaska> On Friday's FESCO Meeting, Adam and Will responded to questions concerning building project-wide consensus around a security policy for Fedora (see FESCO ticket#297)
16:16:56 <cwickert> .fesco 297
16:16:57 <zodbot> cwickert: #297 (Please consider the idea of a security (privilege escalation) policy) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/297
16:17:02 <jlaska> adamw: can you talk to how things went, and what's next?
16:17:09 <adamw> yeppers
16:17:14 <adamw> short version: they kicked it back to us
16:17:32 <adamw> with a promise that if we come up with some kind of draft policy, people who have a clue about security will be gracious enough to review it
16:17:53 <adamw> so as far as FESCo is concerned the next thing that happens is I come back with a draft privilege escalation policy in hand
16:18:13 <cwickert> fesco needs at least some kind of draft
16:18:41 <jlaska> #info as far as FESCo is concerned the next thing that happens is I come back with a draft privilege escalation policy in hand
16:19:16 <jlaska> adamw: is that something you can absorb for this release?
16:19:37 <adamw> i can write up something quick 'n' dirty based on the famous blog post
16:19:43 <adamw> i'll run it by you lot for review before taking it to fesco
16:20:24 <jlaska> #action adamw to build on the famous spot security blog post and draft something quick'n'dirty for QA review
16:20:47 <jlaska> adamw: what's this look like when it's all done to your liking?
16:21:23 <jlaska> translation ... what does 'finished' look like for the security stuff?
16:21:45 <Viking-Ice> dont we need to have a strong base security policy in place that spinners need to document ( including desktop/ all DE ) on what they differ from that policy ?
16:21:57 <adamw> we have some kind of fesco-approved policy and some test cases for it
16:22:07 <adamw> Viking-Ice: you'd've thought so. :)
16:22:35 <jlaska> adamw: okay
16:22:35 <Viking-Ice> It's the only thing that makes sense to do
16:24:09 <jlaska> adamw: Viking-Ice: anything else to discuss, otherwise, let's move on
16:24:27 <adamw> nope, i'm okay
16:24:47 <jlaska> and kudos for the double contraction :)
16:25:02 <jlaska> #topic fedora-release-rawhide
16:25:10 <jlaska> #info wwoods noted that a new fedora-release-rawhide package may impact how we document opting into (and out of) testing rawhide via yum (see Releases/Rawhide#Testing_Rawhide)
16:25:24 <jlaska> wwoods, got anything you'd like to add on this topic?
16:27:10 <jlaska> take that as a no
16:27:12 <wwoods> no, just that we'll need to talk to nirik et. al. to make sure we understand how to get on (and off!) rawhide
16:27:24 <wwoods> and make sure that all the places in the wiki where we talk about that
16:27:28 <wwoods> get updated to reflect the new state of the art
16:27:37 <jlaska> ah, good
16:27:40 <nirik> yeah, I was going to update the Rawhide page when it lands.
16:27:43 <nirik> any help welcome.
16:27:55 <jlaska> nirik: when you say rawhide wiki page ... is that https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/Rawhide ?
16:28:03 <nirik> yeah,
16:28:24 <jlaska> I'm sure we can ask for help on test@l.fp.org following any instructions stubbed on the wiki
16:28:26 <nirik> there really doesn't seem to be any/much other in the way of docs that talks to people about rawhide or how to move to it.
16:28:33 <jlaska> esp since rawhide involvement will be heating up again
16:29:28 <jlaska> #action nirik intends to update the [[Releases/Rawhide]] wiki page to reflect the changes (help appreciated)
16:29:54 <jlaska> that's another area I think beland has some experience in as well, he's helped tweak that page in the past iirc
16:30:02 <nirik> basically it will just be 'yum install fedora-rawhide-release' then edit /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-rawhide.repo and set 'enabled=1'
16:30:22 <jlaska> cool
16:30:38 <jlaska> alrighty ... wwoods, nirik: thanks for the updates
16:30:45 <jlaska> moving on ...
16:30:57 <jlaska> #topic AutoQA Updates - rpmguard (kparal)
16:31:11 <kparal> right
16:31:33 <kparal> so last week me and james enabled sending the rpmguard results to autoqa-results ML
16:31:40 <kparal> so you can have a look
16:31:45 <kparal> together with rpmlint results
16:32:13 <kparal> in the beginning we experienced some networking issues and many tests failed, but it seems to be working well now
16:32:13 <jlaska> #info last week, enabled rpmguard test results to autoqa-results@l.fh.org
16:32:27 <jlaska> kparal: I don't think we ever really figured those errors out, did we/
16:32:28 <jlaska> ?
16:32:33 <kparal> nope
16:32:52 <jlaska> well, it works now :D
16:33:09 <kparal> well, nothing much more about rpmguard, even won't be next week, since I'm doing RHCT
16:33:21 <jlaska> Good luck on the RHCT front
16:33:29 <kparal> but I also started some discussion in autoqa-devel about possible autoqa architecture
16:33:49 <kparal> about creating server to receive all results and provide an API to access them
16:33:55 <kparal> so all comments welcome
16:34:06 <kparal> there are even pictures there! ;)
16:34:15 <wwoods> heh!
16:34:18 <jlaska> #info initiated discussion on autoqa-devel@ about refactoring capturing test results
16:34:21 <jlaska> #link https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/autoqa-devel/2010-January/000120.html
16:34:27 <wwoods> definitely agree we need *some* better way to store results
16:34:52 <kparal> I miss comments "no, you're completely wrong, it should be this way: ...."
16:35:01 <jlaska> heh
16:35:02 <kparal> anyone provide them, please :)
16:35:24 <kparal> ok, that's about it from me
16:36:08 <jlaska> kparal: does a larger discussion on the types of package update tests influence the discussion around how to store/present their test results?
16:36:19 <jlaska> or is that something that can happen in parallel?
16:36:59 <kparal> well, the package update tests will probably have very similar set of output information that should be stored in the results database
16:37:31 <kparal> so we can do it simmultaneously I believe, we don't have to wait for it to finish
16:37:46 <jlaska> okay, gotcha.  thanks
16:38:11 <jlaska> #info next steps ... continue discussion around improving the mechanism for storing test results
16:38:21 <jlaska> alright, moving on to ...
16:38:32 <jlaska> #topic AutoQA Updates - deps/conflicts prevention (wwoods)
16:38:59 <jlaska> okay, so the notes I have from last week are that work is underway w/ lmacken to figure out how to gather information for a post-bodhi-update trigger
16:39:16 <wwoods> yeah, it turns out there's some API calls that alllmost do what we need
16:39:57 <wwoods> lmacken said he was would work on adding the call we need in the next bodhi code update
16:40:20 <wwoods> so in the meantime I started work on the depcheck test itself
16:40:34 <wwoods> which is.. *close* to working, but not quite there. it's tricky business.
16:41:05 <wwoods> the code is in git: http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=autoqa.git;a=blob;f=tests/depcheck/depcheck
16:41:21 <wwoods> hah whoops I forgot to add the GPLv2 boilerplate text
16:41:28 <jlaska> if it involves prco sets, I think my brain will melt! :D
16:42:01 <wwoods> yeah it's kind of complicated - involves PRCO data and package sacks and processing obsoletes and whatnot
16:42:07 <wwoods> but not insurmountable
16:42:15 <wwoods> just gonna take some time to get it right
16:42:33 <jlaska> I like how it's another test designed to be run by hand first
16:42:52 <jlaska> you and kparal are trailblazers there :)
16:43:13 <wwoods> right, that's the design - you give it the name of a repo to check against and a set of new packages to test
16:43:23 <jlaska> #info lmacken is working on adding a missing API call into the next bodhi code update
16:43:51 <wwoods> it checks all the dropped provides, added requires, new conflicts, etc.
16:43:53 <jlaska> #info wwoods started design on an initial depcheck test ... not 100% complete, but close
16:43:59 <jlaska> #link http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=autoqa.git;a=blob;f=tests/depcheck/depcheck
16:44:22 <wwoods> and returns failure if there's any problems that would break repoclosure
16:44:35 <wwoods> it typically takes only a few seconds to run, even when downloading the metadata
16:44:44 <jlaska> that's not too bad at all
16:44:56 <wwoods> which means we can very likely run it for every new rawhide package build / bodhi update
16:45:10 <wwoods> without too much trouble
16:45:49 <abadger1999> nim-nim: ping
16:46:16 <wwoods> so that's depcheck.
16:46:41 <jlaska> sweet, anything else on the depcheck/conflicts front you want to note?
16:47:14 <jlaska> I think you said so already, not sure if there were other non-depcheck items to discuss
16:47:57 <jlaska> I'm going to move on just to keep things going ... but we can come back if needed
16:48:05 <wwoods> nothing comes to mind
16:48:13 <jlaska> wwoods: okay, thanks for the updates!
16:48:24 <jlaska> #topic AutoQA Updates - install automation (lili/rhe)
16:49:04 <jlaska> no big updates to share just yet ... I discussed with lili last week and he is refining a sample python script that automates a virt DVD install
16:49:47 <jlaska> the plan is to get that working, refine it per the requirements discussed in previous meeting around what inputs an automated virt install test would need to accept
16:50:30 <jlaska> wwoods: kparal: while lili is refining his test, do you two have any thoughts on a good way to share his test development progress?
16:50:56 <jlaska> meaning, should I ask lili to contribute the script into git ... or should we continue working it outside of git until it's at a stable point?
16:51:35 <kparal> I think it can surely be in git right now, that's what we have VCS for
16:51:52 <jlaska> that was my thought, but wasn't sure how you two felt about it
16:51:55 <kparal> it can be a separate branch
16:51:59 <kparal> and merged later
16:52:11 <wwoods> yeah - does he already have commit access?
16:52:30 <jlaska> wwoods: I don't believe he does yet.  He's still new to git and python
16:52:37 <wwoods> branches are cheap and (fairly) easy in git
16:53:05 <wwoods> but if he's more comfortable just working on a local git repo until he's satisfied
16:53:09 <wwoods> and sending patches to the list for review
16:53:19 <wwoods> that works too
16:53:36 <jlaska> wwoods: kparal okay thanks gents ... I'll be sure to pass that along
16:53:45 <jlaska> and lili can choose which route he is more comfortable with
16:54:02 <jlaska> #info next steps - continue refining virt dvd install test
16:54:21 <jlaska> #info next steps - look for ways to contribute tests back into git (private checkout, or public branch)
16:54:28 <jlaska> okay, next up ...
16:54:35 <jlaska> #topic AutoQA Updates - packaging/deployment (jlaska)
16:54:49 <jlaska> my two tasks last week were
16:55:21 <jlaska> #info respond to package review feedback for autotest-client (bug#548522)
16:55:22 <buggbot> Bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=548522 medium, medium, ---, nobody, NEW, Review Request: autotest-client - Autotest is a framework for fully automated testing
16:55:43 <jlaska> #info scope out packaging work required for building the autotest BuildRequires gwt (and all of it's bundled deps)
16:56:04 <jlaska> I've got some re-work I'll be attempting with permissions on the autotest-client package
16:56:11 <jlaska> should have that in this week
16:56:34 <jlaska> I'm getting a better handle on the effort required to package gwt (and deps)
16:56:37 <jlaska> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Jlaska/gwt
16:57:02 <jlaska> #info I'll be spending time this week to identify action plans for each of the items listed under 'status uncertain'
16:57:44 <jlaska> once autotest-client is blessed ... I'll file a review request for autoqa
16:57:58 <jlaska> after that ... we should have all we need to deploy the results front-ends in Fedora infrastructure
16:58:06 <jlaska> That's all I have on the packaging/deploy front
16:58:07 <wwoods> yaaay
16:58:40 <jlaska> okay, so let's open things up ...
16:58:43 <jlaska> #topic Open discussion - <Your topic here>
16:58:54 <jlaska> anything folks would like to discuss before closing out the meeting?
16:59:40 <wwoods> when are we scheduled to get rawhide install images?
16:59:46 <jlaska> wwoods: aha, thanks for bringing that up!
17:00:05 <jlaska> so this Thursday (1/21) is a scheduled install image drop to run the rawhide acceptance test plan
17:00:19 <jlaska> #topic open discussion - When is next rawhide install image drop?
17:00:26 <jlaska> #info so this Thursday (1/21) is a scheduled install image drop to run the rawhide acceptance test plan
17:00:42 <jlaska> #link http://poelstra.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-12/f-12-quality-tasks.html
17:01:04 <jlaska> I sent an email out to dcantrell and jkeating for guidance on indentifing who is doing what for this drop
17:01:12 <jlaska> and filed a rel-eng ticket just to track creating the images
17:01:13 * jlaska finds link
17:01:26 <jlaska> #info https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/3277
17:02:05 <jlaska> so we ran through rats_install (finished up last monday) ... and this time should include some bug fixes for issues identified
17:03:52 <jlaska> Rats test results against anaconda-13.16 (using http://clumens.fedorapeople.org/updates.img) - http://jlaska.fedorapeople.org/rats.png
17:03:59 <jlaska> #topic open discussion - <your topic here>
17:04:12 <jlaska> wwoods thanks for reminding me! :D
17:04:19 <kparal> all nicely green
17:04:35 <jlaska> an i386 compose wasn't created ... so there were no results
17:04:56 <RodrigoPadula> hi
17:05:23 <jlaska> any other issues to discuss?  Otherwise, let's close things out and get back to work
17:05:34 <jlaska> RodrigoPadula: hi
17:05:53 <RodrigoPadula> famsco meeting ?
17:06:05 <jlaska> RodrigoPadula: one moment, wrapping up fedora-qa meeting
17:06:11 <jlaska> okay gang ... thanks for your attention
17:06:12 <RodrigoPadula> ops.. soryy
17:06:21 <jlaska> as usual, I'll follow-up to the list with minutes
17:06:27 <jlaska> #endmeeting