test January 2011

test@lists.fedoraproject.org

73 participants
190 discussions

[Fedora QA] #135: Proposed Test Day - TOPIC How about a consideration of the dual boot issues from Fedora 13?
by fedora-badges 25 Feb '13

25 Feb '13

#135: Proposed Test Day - TOPIC How about a consideration of the dual boot issues from Fedora 13? -----------------------+---------------------------------------------------- Reporter: dramsey | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 14 Component: Test Day | Version: Keywords: dual boot | -----------------------+---------------------------------------------------- How about a consideration of the dual boot issues from Fedora 13? I remember from the Fedora 13 timeframe, there were dual boot issues. Would it be advantageous to reconsider a subset of this as well as other lessons learned from the Fedora 13 which may be a good peruse for historical impact and reflection. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/135> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

2 10

[Fedora QA] #151: Tests consistent with Criterion
by fedora-badges 13 Feb '13

13 Feb '13

#151: Tests consistent with Criterion ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ Reporter: rhe | Owner: rhe Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 15 Component: Wiki | Version: Keywords: retrospective | ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ = problem = Criteria was kept changing during F-14 test cycle, but some installation tests didn't update accordingly. On the other hand, the criterion should be modified to include preupgrade_from_older_release test and new tests created for F-15. = enhancement recommendation = Installation tests need be reviewed and updated to fit for the criterion. Criterion for preupgrade_from_older_release test is required. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/151> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 26

[Fedora QA] #82: Update existing dual-boot tests and add to test plan
by fedora-badges 08 Jun '12

08 Jun '12

#82: Update existing dual-boot tests and add to test plan ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ Reporter: jlaska | Owner: Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 14 Component: Wiki | Version: Keywords: retrospective | ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ = problem = See [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=590661 RHBZ#590661 - GRUB bootloader should have a few seconds delay on a multi- boot setup] = analysis = Due to RHBZ #590661, the dual-boot experience was not well understood and tested for the final release. It was discovered late and unclear whether this behavior was critical to Fedora success. = enhancement recommendation = Recommend updating existing dual-boot test cases, and create new test as needed, to reflect updated dual-boot release criteria. Also, add tests to the install matrix (depends on ticket#80). The current tests concern dual-booting windows and Mac. I believe Mac is no longer a primary concern. However, we may wish to add a test for dual- booting Ubuntu or even Fedora. See existing dual-boot tests at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Installer_Dual_Boot_Test_Cases -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/82> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 7

[Fedora QA] #62: Description page for every test case in Package Update Acceptance Test Plan
by fedora-badges 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

#62: Description page for every test case in Package Update Acceptance Test Plan --------------------+------------------------------------------------------- Reporter: kparal | Owner: kparal Type: task | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Wiki | Version: Keywords: | --------------------+------------------------------------------------------- For every test case in Package Update Acceptance Test Plan there should be a separate wiki page with detailed description what gets tested, etc. Some tools and autoqa front-ends may then reference this pages. Also it is needed for package maintainers that will surely want to read something about the test case their package has just failed. The test plan proposal referencing all the test cases is currently here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Kparal/Proposal:Package_update_acceptan… -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/62> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 3

[Fedora QA] #154: Tracker: critical path test case creation
by fedora-badges 07 Dec '11

07 Dec '11

#154: Tracker: critical path test case creation -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Reporter: adamwill | Owner: adamwill Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Wiki | Version: Keywords: | -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- = problem = We need more specific per-package guidance for proven tester testing, to make sure the testing covers all the relevant critical path functionality of each package. = enhancement recommendation = We can create a group of test cases in the Wiki for each critical path package. Bodhi could integrate with this system and, in the future non- numeric karma system, provide checkboxes for each test case for packages which have test cases available. fedora-easy-karma could provide an interface to display and check off test cases from the Wiki. This ticket can serve as a tracker for this process, which will be ongoing. To start with I will file tickets for each package which has so far been identified (on test and devel mailing lists) as an obvious candidate for such test cases, with a note of what should be covered for each package. Those tickets will block this one. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/154> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

3 57

[Fedora QA] #80: Add dual-boot release criteria
by fedora-badges 07 Dec '11

07 Dec '11

#80: Add dual-boot release criteria ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ Reporter: jlaska | Owner: Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 14 Component: Wiki | Version: Keywords: retrospective | ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ = problem = See [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=590661 RHBZ#590661 - GRUB bootloader should have a few seconds delay on a multi- boot setup] = analysis = Due to RHBZ #590661, the dual-boot experience was not well understood and tested for the final release. It was discovered late and unclear whether this behavior was critical to Fedora success. = enhancement recommendation = The user experience of dual-boot scenarios was not well understood, as a result RHBZ #590661 did not clearly impact the release criteria. Recommend reviewing and making adjustments to the release criteria for dual-boot expectations. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/80> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 3

[Fedora QA] #93: Review options to reward key QA contributors
by fedora-badges 07 Dec '11

07 Dec '11

#93: Review options to reward key QA contributors ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ Reporter: jlaska | Owner: jlaska Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 14 Component: Wiki | Version: Keywords: retrospective | ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ = problem = During Fedora 13, a small amount was available to reward several key QA contributors for their efforts. = analysis = If possible, I'd like to repeat this in Fedora 14. = enhancement recommendation = What's the best way to say thanks? 1. Request and secure QA budget to reward key contributors 2. Researching reward options (maxamillion has discussed t-shirt ideas with the design team) -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/93> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 3

[Fedora QA] #89: Improve tracking blocker review status
by fedora-badges 07 Dec '11

07 Dec '11

#89: Improve tracking blocker review status ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ Reporter: jlaska | Owner: poelstra Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 14 Component: Wiki | Version: Keywords: retrospective | ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ = problem = Several bugs were changed so they fell off the tracking lists for Fedora 13. For example... * [http://bugzilla.redhat.com/505189 505189 - Going back to repo UI screen and and modifying Installation Repo causes traceback] * [http://bugzilla.redhat.com/577803 577803 - Adding repository requiring network fails if network is down] = analysis = In F-13, a bugzilla keyword was used to denote blocker status. However, aside from reviewing bugzilla comments, there was no query-able method to determine whether a blocker request is open, approved or denied. This led to several Fedora 13 bugs that were 1) fixed in Rawhide, 2) Moved to MODIFIED or CLOSED and not included, but not included in Fedora 13 (e.g. RHBZ #505189 and RHBZ #577803). Not knowing which bugs were already reviewed, also introduced time wasted reviewing previously reviewed bugs during blocker review meetings. = enhancement recommendation = Recommend reviewing process changes to avoid the scenarios leading up to RHBZ #505189 and RHBZ #577803. Some options discussed so far include 1. Document usage of bugzilla flags (suggested by jkeating) to track blocker requests. This likely involves creating a ''bot'' to police the tags? 2. Hardening the current keyword-based mechanism. Additional discussion points include: 1. Document generating exception report and document action plan for CLOSED Blocker bugs that did not go through VERIFIED. 2. More frequent nag mails leading up to release milestones. Notification of NEW or ASSIGNED bugs goes to the maintainer, and MODIFIED bugs goes to QA. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/89> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 21

[Fedora QA] #149: Mentor Request
by fedora-badges 07 Dec '11

07 Dec '11

#149: Mentor Request -----------------------------------------+---------------------------------- Reporter: hellork | Owner: Type: proventester request | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: Component: Proventester Mentor Request | Version: Keywords: | -----------------------------------------+---------------------------------- = phenomenon = I am interested in joining the protesters and I'm requesting a mentor. = reason = I have been filing bug reports and working on submitting a couple new projects to Fedora. I have a good working knowledge of Yum update, C, C++, Makefiles, Bash, Python, Java, and RPM, packaging, etc. = recommendation = Sign me up! -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/149> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 3

[Fedora QA] #145: Request to join ProvenTester
by fedora-badges 07 Dec '11

07 Dec '11

#145: Request to join ProvenTester -----------------------------------------+---------------------------------- Reporter: dbhole | Owner: Type: proventester request | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Proventester Mentor Request | Version: Keywords: | -----------------------------------------+---------------------------------- OpenJDK is a widely used package, and has quarterly security updates (at the very least). While we (devel and qe) team test it, there is no way for us to set a +1 karma as a proven-tester. To that end, I would like to apply for proven tester status. In addition to OpenJDK, this will also allow me to test and set the proper Karma for other packages our team owns. I'd be happy to follow and training guidelines laid out by a Proventester Mentor. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/145> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance

1 3

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 January 2011