test October 2010

test@lists.fedoraproject.org

137 participants
336 discussions

[Fedora QA] #116: Clarify https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Mediakit_FileConflicts to say that explicit Conflicts: are acceptable
by fedora-badges 23 Jun '11

23 Jun '11

#116: Clarify https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Mediakit_FileConflicts to say that explicit Conflicts: are acceptable ----------------------+----------------------------------------------------- Reporter: adamwill | Owner: rhe Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Wiki | Version: Keywords: | ----------------------+----------------------------------------------------- = bug description = Please update the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Mediakit_FileConflicts test case to clarify that explicit Conflicts: tags are okay. = bug analysis = The relevant release criterion is "No file conflicts or unresolved package dependencies during a media-based (CD/DVD) install". The term "file conflicts" here is important. I believe it's intended to mean that only cases where the files in two packages conflict, but there is no explicit Conflicts: tag in the packages. Where the conflict is properly marked in the packages with Conflicts: tags, this should not be considered an infringement of the criterion. = fix recommendation = Change expected results: 2. No file conflicts were detected for packages included in the media kit, unless the conflicting packages also have explicit Conflicts: tags -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/116> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 19

[Fedora QA] #84: Define install matrix baseline
by fedora-badges 23 Jun '11

23 Jun '11

#84: Define install matrix baseline ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ Reporter: jlaska | Owner: Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 14 Component: Wiki | Version: Keywords: retrospective | ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ = problem = * We almost didn't find [http://bugzilla.redhat.com/578633 RHBZ#578633 - Unable to enter passphrase to unlock encrypted disk partitions] * When re-using test results from a previous test run, it's possible to include results for tests that should be re-tested. This would be bad. = analysis = * F-13 Beta candidate#3 didn't include the correct version of ''plymouth'' (see RHBZ #578633). * Since it was Beta#3 and not much was supposed to change from Beta#2, some test results from the previous Beta#2 candidate were carried forward. * Thankfully, QA found the problem before release while running the QA:Testcase_Anaconda_autopart_(encrypted)_install test. = enhancement recommendation = * Establish better guidelines about which test results can be carried forward from one candidate to the next (this isn't easy). Or perhaps, establish a subset of tests that all respins must undergo. * Perhaps link to, or document at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Installation_validation_testing -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/84> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 6

[Fedora QA] #86: Add test coverage for text-mode upgrade
by fedora-badges 15 Jun '11

15 Jun '11

#86: Add test coverage for text-mode upgrade ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ Reporter: jlaska | Owner: Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 14 Component: Wiki | Version: Keywords: retrospective | ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ = problem = See [http://bugzilla.redhat.com/590823 RHBZ#590823 - Text-mode upgrade fails when installing new bootloader -- KeyError: 'bootloader'] = analysis = Some tests in the [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Installation_Test install test matrix] involve user interface components in both text-mode and graphical-mode (native or VNC). One such bug (RHBZ #590823) involved a problem found only during text-mode upgrades to Fedora 13. The text-mode upgrade screen shows different options thanenhancement recommendation = = enhancement recommendation = I'm hesitant to recommend specific text-mode tests for each user interface element that differs in text-mode and graphical-mode (it would be exhaustive but unachievable). As a catch-all, testing a text-mode install is included in the current matrix. Is there something small that can be done to cover the gap? 1. Perhaps adding a text-mode upgrade test case to the install matrix, or ... 2. Adding variations to the existing upgrade tests [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Anaconda_Upgrade_Update_Bootload… QA:Testcase_Anaconda_Upgrade_Update_Bootloader] and [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Anaconda_Upgrade_Skip_Bootloader QA:Testcase_Anaconda_Upgrade_Skip_Bootloader] to also test text-mode, or ... 3. <insert better idea here> -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/86> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 11

[Fedora QA] #140: Proventester Mentor Request
by fedora-badges 08 Feb '11

08 Feb '11

#140: Proventester Mentor Request -----------------------------------------+---------------------------------- Reporter: mrjfont | Owner: Type: proventester request | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Proventester Mentor Request | Version: Keywords: | -----------------------------------------+---------------------------------- Hi, I am requesting a mentor in order to join this group. I am looking forward to make contributions in order to have a final release of Fedora 14. Thank you; J. Font Fedora Project Contributor Bug Zapper, Triager. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/140> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 3

Fedora install support for netbooks -- small screen size
by Robert Moskowitz 12 Jan '11

12 Jan '11

I am doing another FC12 install on my ASUS 701ee. This is a test system, and I end up installing every month or so. Of course with the small screen size, I end up pressing <cntl-N> a lot, as I cannot see the Next button. And on some screens I just miss some options, like getting to customize the install packages. I am always forgetting the key combo to turn that check box on. Is there some way to either get the ability to pan the screen around or scroll the screen so that on Netbooks that SHOULD be a popular install platform for Fedora, can have workable installation?

18 43

[Fedora QA] #90: Make blocker bug nag mails part of the SOP
by fedora-badges 24 Nov '10

24 Nov '10

#90: Make blocker bug nag mails part of the SOP ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ Reporter: jlaska | Owner: poelstra Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 14 Component: Wiki | Version: Keywords: retrospective | ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ = problem = We have a lot of bugs, and the deadlines for resolving bugs (where resolving == [fixing, documenting]) is not always clear. = analysis = During the lead up to F-13-RC, numerous reminder emails were sent to test@ and devel@ mailing lists noting the number and state of remaining blocker bugs. It is felt that, along with developer time of course, the attention to the blocker list contributed to the resolution of 67 blocker bugs from 2010-04-30 to 2010-05-06. Not knowing which bugs were already reviewed, also introduced time wasted reviewing previously reviewed bugs during blocker review meetings. = enhancement recommendation = 1. Recommend more frequent blocker status emails leading up to '''each''' major milestone. Unclear who should be responsible for sending these mails, QA, rel-eng or program mgmt? 2. Update [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting] with blocker meeting queries or ''python- bugzilla'' commands and where to send the mails (developers bcc'd?) -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/90> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 3

[Fedora QA] #85: Clarify wiki test priority
by fedora-badges 24 Nov '10

24 Nov '10

#85: Clarify wiki test priority ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ Reporter: jlaska | Owner: Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 14 Component: Wiki | Version: Keywords: retrospective | ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ = problem = There was some confusing around the priority listed in the install and desktop test matrices. The question was, why do we give the ''go'' decision to release, even when there are test failures from tests with a matching release level? = analysis = Adam pointed out that ''this is because the bugs exposed caused the test to 'fail', but don't really break the underlying release criteria. I think we could perhaps track this type of 'failure' specifically in the results tables).'' = enhancement recommendation = I ''think'' this is a messaging/education issue. Perhaps we just need to clarify that the priority listed is the test execution priority. It does not always mean that a failure identified by those tests will block the applicable release. Updates or adjustments may be needed to the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/SOP_Release_Validation_Test_Event or to the Fedora 14 test results template (when available -- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Fedora_14_Install_Results_Template) -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/85> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 1

[Fedora QA] #108: Proposed Test Day - Sugar on a Stick
by fedora-badges 24 Nov '10

24 Nov '10

#108: Proposed Test Day - Sugar on a Stick ----------------------+----------------------------------------------------- Reporter: sdz | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 14 Component: Test Day | Version: Keywords: | ----------------------+----------------------------------------------------- Ownership - It'd probably be good if we had both somebody from the SoaS team (at the very least I can sign up, maybe also Mel and Peter) and Fedora QA hosting this. Time frame - August 19 would be our favorite pick. Feature - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Sugar_0.90 Spin - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Sugar_on_a_Stick Notes - http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_on_a_Stick_release_process#Testing_proce… -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/108> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 3

[Fedora QA] #114: Proposed Test Day - Virtualization
by fedora-badges 24 Nov '10

24 Nov '10

#114: Proposed Test Day - Virtualization ----------------------+----------------------------------------------------- Reporter: jforbes | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 14 Component: Test Day | Version: Keywords: | ----------------------+----------------------------------------------------- I will be more than happy to plan/host the test day. Preferred times are 2010-09-23 or 2010-09-30 or any other available day before between the alpha release and then. There are only a couple of new features to be tested, but we need coverage across the board for virtualization as there has been a good bit of change. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/114> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 5

[Fedora QA] #109: Proventester Mentor Request (fcami)
by fedora-badges 16 Nov '10

16 Nov '10

#109: Proventester Mentor Request (fcami) -----------------------------------------+---------------------------------- Reporter: fcami | Owner: Type: proventester request | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Proventester Mentor Request | Version: Keywords: | -----------------------------------------+---------------------------------- I would like to request a mentor to become Proventester. I have read http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester, I agree to abide by the testing requirements and I know how to use bodhi and bugzilla. I do triage from time to time (mainly xorg, especially xorg-x11-drv-ati and mesa). I already use updates-testing enabled for quite of bit of my packages, including some in the critical path, on about five different workstations and servers -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/109> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 9

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

test October 2010