desktop October 2014

desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org

43 participants
46 discussions

Fedora 21 Alpha validation test work
by Adam Williamson 23 Jan '15

23 Jan '15

Hi, folks. So, we're scheduled for Alpha TC1 tomorrow. We had a nice happy co-operative plan where QA and the WGs would collaborate on revising the release validation test process for Fedora.next... ...which, well, didn't really happen. As of this morning we were nowhere near having a viable validation process. So I went for plan B: I spent today more or less pulling the entire thing out of my ass. It's a bit rough around the edges, but I think we more or less have something workable now. I have skipped the draft stage for a lot of documents just in the interest of having something vaguely workable in time for TC1; of course, the pages can be revised as much as necessary as we work with them. It's a bit hard to remember everything I've done, but we now have a draft Alpha Release Criteria page which should cover all release-blocking media, which for now I'm assuming includes the Workstation live media, Server minimal and offline install media, Cloud and ARM disk images, and possibly some kind of generic network install image. That draft is at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_F21_Alpha_criteria and is based on the stuff from https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_server_release_criteria , https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_workstation_release_crit… and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Roshi/QA/Cloud_Docs/Cloud_Alpha_Release… , plus some adjustments to the templates that handle the preamble. We have a new validation matrix, for Server product-specific tests: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Server_validation_results_template The Desktop matrix has been adjusted to cover - not quite elegantly, but at least cover - both the Workstation product and the KDE spin: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Desktop_validation_results_template The Base matrix has been extended to add a couple of new test cases that came out of the Product criteria drafting process, but actually aren't really product specific, and has had its columns adjusted to be product-y: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Base_validation_results_template The installation matrix has similarly had a couple of new criteria wedged in, but much more importantly, I ripped the netinst, DVD and live image 'sanity test' sections and replaced them with an ARM-style table where a single 'generic' test case is run against several images on several platforms - that's the "Default boot and install" section, so please cast an eye over it: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Fedora_21_Install_Results_Template and I made a small change to the release validation test event SOP to list the server matrix as one to create: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/SOP_Release_Validation_Test_Event Here are links to all (I think) of the new test cases I had to write as I went along: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Boot_default_install https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_kickstart_user_creation https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_base_service_manipulation https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_base_selinux https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Server_firewall_default https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_kickstart_firewall https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Server_cockpit_default The following test cases already existed, but are newly included in the release validation process (they were written for test days): https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_FreeIPA_realmd_join https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_realmd_join_kickstart https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_realmd_join_server There are still quite a few i's to dot and t's to cross. There are some release criteria and test cases that explicitly reference 'the DVD' image that will need to be adjusted. We need to apply the 'associated release criterion' template to all the new test cases, and probably clean up some categorizations. Various other process documentation pages may need to be updated, we'll have to check through all of them. But I think now we at least have the broad strokes of what's needed for .next validation testing. All feedback on the above changes is of course welcome! Please do cast your eye over and point out anything I missed, anything that looks silly, any possible improvements and so on. Remember, though, this is really *test process* design: we're not actually doing product design here, if you think there are issues with the Fedora.next changes themselves, that goes to the WGs or FESCo. As far as this work is concerned, we're just trying to test the new Products as they're designed (all of the above is based off of the Product PRDs and tech specs). I'll take time tomorrow to do some polishing, and of course look at any and all feedback on the stuff I did today. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

3 3

NTP switch in gnome-control-center is broken
by Michael Catanzaro 19 Nov '14

19 Nov '14

Hi, Let's decide what to do about https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1136905 Long story short: timedated no longer supports NTP clients other than timesyncd (the new systemd NTP client). Oversimplifying, the chrony developers say that chrony is better than timesyncd, and the systemd developers say that timesyncd is better than chrony. We need to remove chrony from the default install and figure out what to do for users upgrading to F21 (if we do not uninstall chrony, the switch will be broken), or patch out the change to timedated, or build systemd without timedated and provide our own implementation of it, or patch gnome-control-center. None of these seem like particularly good options. Removing chrony seems like an easy solution, but I'm not sure how we could handle upgrades without hurting users who don't want chrony to be removed. Michael

9 25

Reporting validation results with relval: please update python-mwclient to 0.7
by Adam Williamson 31 Oct '14

31 Oct '14

Hi, folks. Sorry for the cross-post, but wanted to try reach everyone I'd mentioned my little 'relval' tool to. If you have been using 'relval' to report validation results, or are thinking of trying it, please make sure you update python-mwclient to 0.7. Josef Skladanka submitted a few results using relval yesterday which messed up the Desktop page, and kindly fixed up the page and let me know about the problem (thanks, Josef!) On investigation I found the problem is that python-mwclient 0.6.5 is missing the ability to read in the text of a single page section (it looks like it has it, but it actually doesn't). Any time you submit a result to a multi-section page with python-mwclient 0.6.5, this will happen. With python-mwclient 0.7 it works fine. I'm going to send out a python-wikitcms update which requires python-mwclient 0.7 ASAP, and get the python-mwclient 0.7 update into stable for all releases also ASAP, but just in case anyone isn't updating regularly or anything, I thought I'd send a note. Thanks! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

WG members, please select next meeting time
by Paul W. Frields 31 Oct '14

31 Oct '14

You can select your choices here: http://whenisgood.net/xfr4i5y I've set the choices as either (or both if they're equally good for you) of Wed 2014-Nov-05, 10:00am EST (1500 UTC) or 11:00am EST (1600 UTC). By keeping the same UTC time, the meeting moves an hour earlier for most people as of next week when the USA joins the rest of the world in dropping DST. By moving it an hour later in UTC, the same wall-clock time will hold for everyone. Working group members, please enter your choices at the URL above and please enter your name in the form as well, so we can tell who will be missed at a particular time slot. If for some reason neither choices yields a quorum by Friday I'll post a bigger matrix and we can reset the time, but hopefully we can avoid that. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com

1 1

Fwd: [Test-Announce] Fedora 21 Beta Release Candidate 4 (RC4) Available Now!
by Adam Williamson 29 Oct '14

29 Oct '14

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [Test-Announce] Fedora 21 Beta Release Candidate 4 (RC4) Available Now! Date: 2014-10-29 19:16 From: Andre Robatino <robatino(a)fedoraproject.org> To: test-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Reply-To: test(a)lists.fedoraproject.org NOTE: The last compose was RC2. As per the Fedora 21 schedule [1], Fedora 21 Beta Release Candidate 4 (RC4) is now available for testing. Content information, including changes, can be found at https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6010#comment:19 . Please see the following pages for download links (including delta ISOs) and testing instructions. Normally dl.fedoraproject.org should provide the fastest download, but download-ib01.fedoraproject.org is available as a mirror (with an approximately 1 hour lag) in case of trouble. To use it, just replace "dl" with "download-ib01" in the download URL. Installation: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Installation_Test Base: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Base_Test Workstation and Desktop: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test Server: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Server_Test Cloud: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Cloud_Test Summary: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Summary Ideally, all Alpha and Beta priority test cases for each of these test pages [2] should pass in order to meet the Beta Release Criteria [3]. Help is available on #fedora-qa on irc.freenode.net [4], or on the test list [5]. Create Fedora 21 Beta test compose (TC) and release candidate (RC) https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6010 Current Blocker and Freeze Exception bugs: http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current [1] http://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-21/f-21-quality-tasks.html [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_21_Beta_Release_Criteria [4] irc://irc.freenode.net/fedora-qa [5] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test _______________________________________________ test-announce mailing list test-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test-announce -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

Fedora 21 Beta RC4 live images available for early testing
by Adam Williamson 29 Oct '14

29 Oct '14

This is not the official announcement as the compose has not been signed off by release engineering, but the Beta RC4 lives are now all complete in Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/tasks?method=createLiveCD&state=closed&v… and I've put the validation pages up - see all the usual suspects: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Installation_Test https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Base_Test https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Summary the other pages are up too, but we can't really do Server or Cloud tests yet. As we're right up against Go/No-Go again (sigh...) it'd be a good idea to get testing rolling early with the live builds, we can at least blow through the desktop tests and quite a lot of the installer tests using the lives. Any help with getting as much of the validation done as possible would be great. Thanks, folks! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

New Workstation WG liaison
by Josh Boyer 29 Oct '14

29 Oct '14

Hi All, With Beta approaching and the new Fedora Council changes I've been doing some self-reflection. I was selected as the Engineering representative for the Council and I think that's going to require a bit more time investment on my part in things other than Workstation. With that in mind, I've been thinking about finding a new WG liaison. I've spoken with most of the Workstation WG and we seem to be in agreement that Paul Frields would make an excellent liaison. He's very familiar with Workstation and Fedora process. Paul has agreed to take on this role pending approval from FESCo. As a reminder, the liaison does not have to be a member of FESCo. They need to be approved by the WG and FESCo, and be able to work with both. I don't think this will be a problem for Paul at all. I will bring this up with FESCo shortly, but I wanted to allow time for comments before we go ahead with this. If you have questions or comments, please share. josh

3 4

Announcing Fedora Outreach mailing list -- please subscribe if interested
by Matthew Miller 29 Oct '14

29 Oct '14

Because response to the Fedora Outreach Steering Committee proposal has been overwhelmingly positive, I created a new mailing list, initially to discuss the possible creation of such a group and to coordinate actually doing it, and then eventually to be a discussion list _for_ the group. If you are interested in this, please subscribe at <https://lists.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/outreach>. Thanks! [This message is massively multi-posted — please don't reply. Instead, discuss on the new list!] -- Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader

1 0

Proposal: install dnf-plugins-core by default
by Jiri Eischmann 29 Oct '14

29 Oct '14

Hi, I tested the latest compose of F21 Workstation and found out that dnf-plugins-core was not included in the default installation. IMHO it's something we should fix. The package includes plugins that allow users to easily work with Copr repositories and the planned Playground repository. It should be part of the default user experience because it's one of the nice details and integration with our services. Copr has proven to be useful for both us (to give early adopters software they can test, e.g. GNOME 3.12 in F20) and users (to easily get new software which is not included in the official repositories yet) and we should make working with it as easy as possible. For those who don't know it: with this plugin you can easily add/remove Copr repositores just by "dnf enable/disable name/project" instead of inconvenient copying/deleting repo files. I know that DNF is not yet the default package manager, but many users already use it instead of yum just for these kind of things, so let's give them the full experience of DNF. An impact on the image size is minimal. The total size of dnf-plugins-core including all its dependencies is 151 kB. Jiri

3 4

Fedora 21 Beta RC2 status is **FAILED**, RC3 will be coming
by Adam Williamson 29 Oct '14

29 Oct '14

Wanted to keep everyone in the loop so people don't feel like their time has been wasted. We discovered at the blocker review meeting today that there's a problem with the RC2 compose. Blocker and FE packages that were pushed stable yesterday - https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5988#comment:17 - were taken out of the 'bleed' repository where blocker/FE fixes are pulled into composes before they go stable, but they did not actually get mashed/distributed in time to be included in the RC2 compose. The upshot is that RC2 has incorrect (old) versions of initscripts, systemd and fedup-dracut. This means that RC2 will be subject to at least https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114786 , https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1099299 and https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1146580 , so it definitely cannot be released as the Beta. We will need an RC3 compose, and testing of RC2 will not be sufficient to clear RC3 for release due to the significance of systemd. Testing of RC2 is not entirely useless - it's still useful to check there are no regressions in anaconda 21.48-13, for instance - but we will need to do a good degree of testing on RC3 when it lands later today before we can consider clearing RC3 for release. I'm very sorry to folks who've already put work into testing RC2 for the mistake. Keep your eyes peeled for RC3! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

desktop October 2014