14:05:03 <jlaska> #startmeeting Beakerlib + AutoQA
14:05:03 <zodbot> Meeting started Tue May 18 14:05:03 2010 UTC.  The chair is jlaska. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:05:03 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
14:05:14 <jlaska> #meetingname beakerlib-and-autoqa
14:05:14 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'beakerlib-and-autoqa'
14:05:34 <jlaska> #topic Gathering
14:06:07 <jlaska> okay, I think we've got the expected participants
14:06:11 <jlaska> afri: kparal: psss
14:06:18 <jlaska> are we missing anyone?
14:06:20 * kparal here
14:06:51 * psss here as well...
14:06:57 * afri here
14:06:57 <kparal> I don't think so, they would ask where the meeting is if they wanted to come
14:07:22 <jlaska> kparal: heh, okay ... let's get started
14:08:03 <jlaska> for anyone not familiar with MeetBot (http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot), I encourage excessive use of #info, #action, #link, #idea and #help
14:08:12 <kparal> #help
14:08:27 <kparal> no help for me :)
14:09:01 <jlaska> #topic Check-in on package review status
14:09:12 <kparal> "Counter-intuitively, this doesn't provide help on the bot" -- ah, sorry
14:09:21 <jlaska> afri: you want to take it away?  sounds like good updates on the review request?
14:09:46 <jlaska> kparal: I think you just put out a general call for assistance :)  People in black suits will be arriving shortly
14:09:59 <afri> #info beakerlib was approved for fedora
14:10:08 <kparal> yupee
14:10:21 * jlaska extends thanks to nirik and afri
14:10:28 <jlaska> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561470
14:10:30 <buggbot> Bug 561470: medium, medium, ---, kevin, ASSIGNED, Review Request: beakerlib - shell-level integration testing library
14:10:35 <afri> i'm not sponsored yet, it seems
14:11:04 <kparal> I guess it will arrive in F13 updates then?
14:11:34 <afri> I don't want to be rude, so I'll wait for a while and then I'll try to poke
14:12:21 <jlaska> afri: so once you've got FAS sponsorship, you'll be able to submit to CVS and do a build?
14:12:32 * jlaska refreshing on the steps outlined at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process
14:12:47 <afri> jlaska, yeah
14:13:05 <jlaska> your @ step#8 I think
14:13:57 <jlaska> anything else to discuss here?
14:14:12 <jlaska> once packages are built and available, we'll probably need to update the autoqa scripts that rely on beakerlib?
14:14:31 <jlaska> to install from Fedora proper, and not the l33t afri package repo
14:14:58 <afri> I'll let you know when this happens
14:15:35 <afri> so you can fix the scripts
14:15:43 <kparal> jlaska: yes, but it should be trivial
14:16:17 <jlaska> afri: kparal: okay
14:16:32 <jlaska> good stuff, nice to see the review behind us!
14:16:35 <jlaska> next up ...
14:16:43 <jlaska> #topic Initscript tests
14:17:06 <jlaska> The original link I have describing this topic is -- https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/autoqa-devel/2010-March/000276.html
14:17:08 * kparal misses jskladan
14:17:17 <jlaska> jskladan is out sick today, so not sure what updates we have
14:17:47 <kparal> well I know he worked on adding several dozens more test cases into that test
14:17:59 <kparal> all re-taken from baseos team
14:18:04 <jlaska> Also, the current set of initscript tests are working nicely ... https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/autoqa-results/2010-May/020018.html
14:19:33 <kparal> what slowed him down a little is the need to report deficiencies in those scripts to their maintainers
14:19:45 <kparal> apart from that they should be soon committed into git I believe
14:19:48 <jlaska> aha, do you recall what kind of trouble he was running into?
14:19:55 <jlaska> anything major?
14:20:23 <kparal> well just the common stuff, scripts that don't reset services to their original state, etc
14:20:33 <kparal> afaik
14:20:38 <jlaska> aha, yeah that one will definitely be critical for us! :)
14:20:53 <jlaska> kparal: you are also virtual
14:21:00 <jlaska> ... jskladan today
14:21:04 <jlaska> :)
14:21:29 <kparal> no way, missing his python expertise
14:21:31 <jlaska> #info jskladan working several initscript issues with original maintainers
14:21:48 <jlaska> #info expecting a new round of initscript tests landing in git soon
14:22:05 <jlaska> are we tracking the initscript work in any way, I don't think it's attached to an existing roadmap
14:22:08 <jlaska> should it be?
14:22:28 * kparal looking
14:22:48 <kparal> we don't have a milestone for that, true
14:23:11 <jlaska> any preference on creating a new milestone vs adding to "Package Update tests"?
14:23:21 <jlaska> or option #3) no milestone
14:23:27 <kparal> I see just one opened ticket against iniscripts: https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/125
14:23:46 <kparal> maybe we can put it into Package update tests
14:24:20 <kparal> I would do it like that
14:24:20 <jlaska> kparal: okay, I can take that.  I'll sync up w/ jskladan when he gets back to see if he's tracking any other initscript plans as well
14:24:26 <jlaska> okay
14:24:57 <kparal> #info probably add initscripts tickets to Package Update Tests milestone
14:25:04 <jlaska> #action jlaska will add jskladan's initscript changes to Package Update Tests (https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/milestone/Package%20update%20tests)
14:25:16 * kparal too active
14:25:19 <jlaska> cool, anything else on this topic?
14:25:56 <kparal> that's all I think
14:26:27 <jlaska> okay, the spot light moves to kparal ...
14:26:34 <jlaska> and psss of course :)
14:26:37 * kparal waves
14:26:40 <jlaska> #topic Package Sanity Tests
14:27:02 <jlaska> looks like you both have been busy, how are things going?
14:27:05 <kparal> so, I have added useful links to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Package_Sanity_Test_Plan#Links so you can find everything relevant quickly
14:27:36 <kparal> psss has provided a basic version of the sanity test -- the 'pst' script
14:27:50 <kparal> and I have recently added an AutoQA wrapper
14:28:14 <kparal> so you can easily run that like this "autoqa post-koji-build --name tzdata --kojitag dist-f12-updates --arch x86_64 tzdata-2010i-1.fc12 -t package_sanity"
14:28:24 <kparal> actually, it works :)
14:28:49 <jlaska> kparal: you seem surprised! :)
14:28:49 <kparal> there are still many issues to solve, see the tickets
14:29:18 <kparal> currently all the tickets are intertwined, some are reported against pst script itself, some against the wrapper
14:29:26 <kparal> but I guess it's not really a problem
14:29:49 <jlaska> looks like a few might also be tightly coupled with wwoods post-bodhi-update work too?
14:30:05 <kparal> they sure are
14:30:20 <jlaska> well, I guess just one (https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/139)
14:30:47 <kparal> that's the basic problem we hit with every other package update test
14:31:02 <jlaska> yeah
14:31:04 <kparal> once that is solved, it will close multiple tickets
14:31:46 <kparal> psss is now really busy with some perl security errata (ugh!), so has some tickets pending for proposed pst modifications, but they are not so important right now
14:32:08 <kparal> there are still lots of thing to do on the autoqa side, like experiment with testing in virtualized guests, etc
14:32:26 <jlaska> kparal: psss: outside of the ticket work, any next big hurdle you want to discuss, or track, in the meeting for PST?
14:33:21 <kparal> two big hurdles: 1) we must test packages on machine with correct Fedora release installed or use virt guests
14:33:35 <kparal> 2) the famous updates-candidate testing problem
14:33:44 <kparal> that are the main issues I believe
14:33:48 <jlaska> now _infamous_ :)
14:34:20 <jlaska> #info Next hurdles - #1 we must test packages on machine with correct Fedora release installed or use virt guests
14:34:26 <jlaska> #info Next hurdles - #2 the famous updates-candidate testing problem
14:35:02 <kparal> psss: anything from your side?
14:35:40 <psss> nothing extra... once, i'm finished with the perl errata, i'll try to start work on the remaining pst tickets...
14:36:11 <jlaska> alright, thanks for the updates :)
14:36:15 <jlaska> if nothing else ... open discussion time
14:37:10 <kparal> just a question, once the beakerlib is in Fedora, the BaseOS team is going to use that or will there be still some modified internal version?
14:37:35 * kparal not sure if anyone can answer that :)
14:37:37 <jlaska> #topic open discussion - beakerlib EPEL?
14:37:49 <jlaska> kparal: they could also just also build it for EPEL
14:37:58 <jlaska> but certainly up to them, I guess
14:38:57 <jlaska> afri: any thoughts here?
14:38:57 <psss> i guess we'll be using the same BL, just built for rhel + our internal plugin
14:39:10 <kparal> I was just think about some incompatibilities between upstream beakerlib and internal one, like the path (/usr/share and /usr/lib)
14:39:14 <kparal> *thinking
14:39:53 <kparal> once we have 50 initscripts in autoqa, every change means it is more difficult to maintain :)
14:40:02 <kparal> *initscripts tests
14:40:11 <kparal> alright, fine, thanks
14:40:18 <afri> jlaska, we are using the identical beakerlib in RHTS, just rebuilt for RHEL5
14:40:31 <psss> about the paths: all new tests should use the new /usr/share path...
14:40:49 <psss> and perhaps the internal plugin will still have the backward compat link?
14:40:58 <afri> BL knows plugins, so we added a plugin rpm, which contains a RH internal stuff, as well as the compatibility symlinks
14:41:09 <afri> so we keep the incompatibilities just inhouse
14:41:42 <kparal> but that also means that maintainers are not forced to fix the scripts for upstream :)
14:41:44 <jlaska> ah clever, are you planning on having that included in the fedora src.rpm, but just disabled from building in Fedora?
14:42:44 <kparal> we will have to have some other session thinking about the collaboration between baseos initscript tests maintainers and our "upstream" versions
14:42:48 <afri> not planning to do so, it's a mess
14:43:16 <afri> I would prefer to do a massive scripted test-update
14:44:00 <jlaska> okay, so 2 topics discussed here
14:44:16 <jlaska> #info discussed how to update existing tests to use new paths (e.g. /usr/share/... instead of /usr/lib)
14:45:14 <jlaska> #info discussed future maintenance of beakerlib (how best to manage maintaining custom plug-ins and Fedora package)
14:45:53 <jlaska> kparal: afri: should we queue this up for a future topic?
14:46:26 <kparal> yes, info 2 is not a hot issue now, but it will become once we have dozens of tests inside autoqa
14:46:48 <kparal> so it's just a prospective topic
14:47:18 <jlaska> there are several packages that manage to have a single source housed in Fedora, but allow for extra plugins to build when built against RHEL
14:47:24 <jlaska> I think 'report' is a recent example
14:47:33 <afri> I don't think the maintenance of beakerlib is an issue
14:47:58 <jlaska> okay
14:48:18 <jlaska> #topic open discussion - <your topic here>
14:48:31 <jlaska> Anything else to discuss today?
14:48:33 <afri> I will maintain 1) fedora version 2) internal plugin - this doesn't make sense to be upstream, it contains some infrastructure details
14:48:53 <jlaska> afri: okay, sounds good
14:48:55 <afri> we generally try to have everything possible in fedora version
14:50:24 <jlaska> afri: yeah, I wasn't trying to tell you how to do it, just offering suggestions in case that makes the package maintenance any easier
14:50:36 <jlaska> but it sounds like you've got that well under control!
14:50:52 <jlaska> okay, no new topics ... let's end the meeting
14:51:01 <jlaska> #topic Next meeting
14:51:15 <jlaska> Any suggestions here?
14:51:38 <kparal> I think just to review current status of all the stuff
14:51:39 <jlaska> we can stick to the usual schedule, email check-in next week, and another meeting on Tuesday, June 1
14:51:50 <kparal> ah, the  time
14:52:26 <kparal> as you prefer, I'm good with it
14:52:43 <jlaska> okay, we'll check-in over email next week ... and see how things go from there
14:53:10 <jlaska> afri: psss: any preference ... more frequent, less frequent?
14:53:31 <afri> jlaska, I'm ok with current way
14:53:47 <psss> usual time/schedule fine for myself
14:53:53 <jlaska> okay, thanks folks
14:54:12 <jlaska> #info 2010-05-25 - Check-in over email (perhaps autoqa-devel@ list)
14:54:39 <jlaska> #info 2010-06-01 - Celebrate the first of June with another in-person meeting
14:54:45 <jlaska> Okay, that's all I've got
14:54:47 <jlaska> thanks everyone
14:54:51 <jlaska> #endmeeting