fedora-qa
LOGS
15:01:52 <adamw> #startmeeting Fedora QA Meeting
15:01:52 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon May 26 15:01:52 2014 UTC.  The chair is adamw. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:01:52 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
15:02:02 <adamw> #meetingname fedora-qa
15:02:02 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa'
15:02:08 <adamw> #topic Roll call
15:02:14 <adamw> ahoyhoyhoy
15:02:21 * satellit listening
15:02:26 * mkrizek is here
15:02:35 <adamw> who's around for qa fun times?
15:02:46 * pschindl is here (but I have to leave in 15 minutes)
15:03:00 <adamw> our first viking-ice free meeting? :(
15:03:21 * kparal here
15:03:55 <misc> let's call it "comma-full" meeting
15:05:04 * tflink is around
15:07:21 <adamw> hehe
15:07:45 <adamw> #chair misc tflink
15:07:45 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw misc tflink
15:08:37 <adamw> okey dokey, let's gooo
15:08:42 <adamw> #topic Previous meeting follow-up
15:09:44 <adamw> #info "adamw to synthesize server, desktop and cloud test outlines to give a rough idea of required fedora.next test coverage and kickstart a discussion of how it should be organized" - did that: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2014-May/121396.html , and it's the first topic for discussion this week
15:09:55 <adamw> that's all i had as a formal action item, anything else to follow up on?
15:13:14 <adamw> well, I guess not!
15:13:25 <adamw> #topic Fedora 21 test plan discussion
15:13:39 <adamw> so, as linked above, i put up a draft f21 'test plan' as a sort of trial balloon
15:13:46 <adamw> did folks get a chance to read it yet? any thoughts on the plan?
15:14:11 <kparal> I read it briefly
15:14:38 <kparal> I think it's good
15:14:49 <kparal> I studied mainly the responsibilities section
15:15:03 <kparal> I think it proposes a reasonable balance
15:16:08 <tflink> are the WG's criteria going to be part of the blocker meetings, then?
15:16:20 <tflink> or is the idea to separate the processes?
15:16:45 <kparal> that's a good point, are we going to vote on their criteria, or will their representatives always be present?
15:17:29 <satellit> will workstation only be a live or a boot.iso choice?
15:17:50 <adamw> tflink: i was kinda assuming we'd keep the same combined process, but it's a good question
15:18:07 <adamw> satellit: I believe their only official deliverable is the live
15:18:12 <satellit> k
15:18:39 <kparal> they might not be interested in attending a blocker bug meeting where generic/other WGs' issues get discussed
15:18:57 <adamw> tflink: we do have the option of 'devolving' the process and letting WGs handle their own blocker issues
15:19:03 <kparal> so maybe we will need to do some time slots, covering particular WG's issues
15:19:04 <adamw> might be interesting to get the WGs'/fesco's take on that
15:19:35 <tflink> if they're deciding on the criteria, it seems a little odd that we'd be interpreting them
15:20:01 <kparal> the release schedule is the same for all WGs, right? so a single WG can block other products from releasing?
15:20:29 <tflink> kparal: more blocker review meetings :)
15:20:46 <tflink> have any of the WGs started on the criteria process?
15:20:46 <adamw> kparal: at least for f21, indeed it is
15:20:52 <adamw> tflink: not afaik
15:21:12 <kparal> tflink: I'll need to develop some ack-ing bot, after all
15:21:57 <tflink> kparal: no kidding
15:22:24 <tflink> f21 branches in what, a little over a month?
15:22:35 <kparal> if they can block other products, I think we should be involved in the blocker bug discussion. although we might lack knowledge to properly understand some of those very specific issues. that's a bit unfortunate
15:22:39 <adamw> forget autoqa, clearly autoack is the most important dev priority
15:22:45 <tflink> or is that date still "no earlier than"?
15:23:08 <adamw> kparal: well, we can be involved however it's organized, i guess
15:23:17 <adamw> tflink: July 8, 'no earlier than'
15:23:20 <adamw> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/21/Schedule
15:23:47 <tflink> sounds like it's up for discussion again @ the next fesco meeting
15:24:24 <tflink> the schedule, I mean
15:25:01 <adamw> interesting
15:25:12 <adamw> but yeah, we have at least 6 weeks or so to get the criteria and process nailed down
15:25:58 <adamw> #info tflink noted that it has to be decided whether Products will have their own blocker review process or we will retain one project-wide review process
15:26:12 <tflink> if this is going to involve feature requests for the tracker, it'd be nice to know soon :)
15:26:39 <tflink> eg, tracking multiple products on the same page, multiple trackers
15:27:55 <adamw> thinking about it, trying to split up the process would add quite a lot of complexity
15:28:31 <adamw> we'd have to somehow split the bugs by product, which either involves asking reporters to do it at the 'blocker nomination' stage and trusting them to get it right, or some kind of triage
15:28:45 <adamw> unless bugzilla is going to be split per-Fedora-product, which i don't think is going to happen
15:30:29 <tflink> keeping them together is going to be more complexity as well, but probably less than splitting them up
15:30:46 <tflink> I can see getting into a situation where a blocker is bounced between meetings at least once
15:31:33 * satellit if desktop is on boot.iso and workstation is the live version...how note differences in BZ?
15:32:23 <adamw> tflink: yeah, though we'd want to try and make sure we had a rep from each group at each meeting
15:32:28 <adamw> or at least each meeting we had a blocker from their product
15:33:02 <adamw> satellit: yeah, that'd be fun
15:33:23 <adamw> satellit: if the bug really only happened from boot.iso, it wouldn't be a Workstation product blocker
15:33:32 <satellit> k
15:33:56 <tflink> adamw: I suspect that isn't going to work incredibly well given past scheduling fun
15:34:50 <adamw> tflink: we'd have to be somewhat more forceful about it than we are about getting devel/releng folks to show up
15:36:33 * satellit is desktop still a blocking DE? in f21
15:36:46 <adamw> satellit: there's no DE called "desktop"
15:37:02 <satellit> gnome3
15:37:04 <adamw> satellit: there's a DE called GNOME, and it's still release blocking of course
15:37:10 <satellit> k
15:37:25 <adamw> though i do need to revisit the criteria language about 'release blocking desktops' and see if it still makes sense in a .next world
15:38:13 * satellit but no live for testing Gnome-desktop
15:39:08 <adamw> well, the Workstation product basically is the GNOME live.
15:39:38 <adamw> whether we'd count issues from installing GNOME via boot.iso as release blocking is kinda an interesting question, it ultimately depends on how important the project decides boot.iso is, i guess
15:41:11 <adamw> there are a few things like that which i think we're gonna have to to shake out as we go along, hard to predict everything
15:42:42 <adamw> welp, thanks for the feedback so far
15:42:43 <adamw> anything else?
15:44:03 <tflink> other than making sure we get product WG feedback, not much
15:44:07 <adamw> of course
15:44:24 <adamw> welp, then
15:44:26 <adamw> #topic Open floor
15:44:33 <adamw> anything else? how's taskotron coming, tflink?
15:44:51 <tflink> we're adjusting to a time-based release cadence
15:45:22 <tflink> trying to get ready to deploy to a production system - there's lots of "behind the scenes" stuff left to do in order to get ready for that
15:45:41 <tflink> autoqa-stg has been retired
15:46:25 <adamw> sounds like we're in the finishing stretch at least
15:46:33 <tflink> in theory, depcheck is almost ready to start running in dev/stg
15:46:47 <adamw> #info taskotron is doing 'behind the scenes' preparation for production deployment
15:47:21 <tflink> other work is progressing well, will have another release on friday
15:47:47 <adamw> coolbeans
15:48:13 <tflink> the bodhi2/taskotron FAD is next week in Denver
15:49:33 * adamw nods long as if he absolutely knew that was a thing that was happening
15:49:46 <tflink> adamw: I thought you knew about that, actually
15:50:01 <tflink> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAD_Bodhi2_Taskotron_2014
15:50:09 <adamw> where was it discussed?
15:50:52 <tflink> infra list and meetings, mostly. I don't recall where the initial announcements were
15:51:57 <adamw> ah, i don't usually follow those :/
15:52:12 <adamw> welp, hope it works out well
15:52:38 <tflink> I think it'll answer a lot of questions about taskotron deployment and future bodhi2 integration
15:52:50 <adamw> sounds great
15:52:54 <tflink> specifically making the whole "automation feedback in bodhi comments" thing die in a fire
15:53:07 <adamw> #info there is a bodhi2 / taskotron FAD occurring next week in Denver
15:53:11 <adamw> tflink: yaaay fire
15:53:20 * kparal offers the match
15:53:56 <tflink> kparal: I'll bring the petrol
15:54:43 <adamw> we have an unlimited budget for FIIIIIRE
15:55:28 <adamw> welp, sounds like we're about done
15:56:19 * adamw sets Quantum Fuse
15:57:44 * satellit afk....
15:58:10 <adamw> thanks for coming, folks!
15:58:58 <adamw> #endmeeting