--- Log opened Wed Feb 18 11:02:11 2009
wwoodsviking_ice? adamw? anyone else?11:02
-!- adamw [n=AdamW@redhat/adamw] has joined #fedora-meeting11:02
-!- warren [n=warren@redhat/wombat/warren] has joined #fedora-meeting11:02
wwoodsso, hi11:03
* viking_ice * 11:03
wwoodswaiting for evolution to start back up so I can check if there's anything to add to the agenda11:03
-!- sdziallas [n=sebastia@p57A2B810.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit ["Ex-Chat"]11:04
-!- MostafaDaneshvar [n=MostafaD@unaffiliated/mostafadaneshvar] has joined #fedora-meeting11:04
-!- nicubunu [n=nicubunu@mail.apsro.com] has left #fedora-meeting ["Fading into sunset"]11:04
-!- sdziallas [n=sebastia@p57A2B810.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #fedora-meeting11:04
wwoodsah, okay11:06
wwoodsso yes11:06
wwoodsfirst, let's talk about autoqa for a bit!11:06
-!- wwoods changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: Fedora QA Meeting | autoqa11:06
wwoodsThe git repo for this is: http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=autoqa.git;a=summary11:07
-!- MostafaDaneshvar [n=MostafaD@unaffiliated/mostafadaneshvar] has left #fedora-meeting []11:08
-!- Matias_Arg [n=root@host169.200-45-216.telecom.net.ar] has joined #fedora-meeting11:08
wwoodsin short, it's a set of a) things that watch for events, b) tests to run when certain things happen, and c) a harness that handles running the tests in response to the event11:08
-!- Matias_Arg [n=root@host169.200-45-216.telecom.net.ar] has left #fedora-meeting []11:08
wwoodsfor things like repos updating, new builds in koji, new updates in bodhi, etc.11:08
wwoodslast night we got our very first test running11:09
viking_iceyea :)11:09
f13https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Automated_QA_Testing_Project is the wiki page covering the project11:09
wwoodsf13 wrote code that watches for repo changes11:09
wwoodsand I wrote a simple test that runs repoclosure on the given repo(s)11:10
wwoodsit's running on a host in the fedora infrastructure and currently just sends mails to the qa-admin group11:10
wwoodscurrently it tries to send test results and logs to a results server11:10
wwoodswe've basically stripped that out and told it to just email us the raw stdout/stderr11:11
wwoodsin the near future we want to create an actual results server.. and start sending results to it11:11
-!- Gaaruto [n=Gaaruto@fedora/Gaaruto] has quit ["++"]11:11
-!- bo09 [n=bo09@nat/redhat/x-0363b9a26b15aec2] has joined #fedora-meeting11:11
-!- Gaaruto [n=Gaaruto@fedora/Gaaruto] has joined #fedora-meeting11:11
wwoodswe'll also need more watchers, more hooks, and more tests11:11
-!- Gaaruto [n=Gaaruto@fedora/Gaaruto] has quit [Client Quit]11:11
wwoodsbut first we need to get the harness working properly, and make sure we're happy with how tests are written 11:12
f13with a results server we can do more logical things, like compare results from previous runs, autofile bugs, update websites and send email, etc...11:12
-!- Gaaruto [n=Gaaruto@fedora/Gaaruto] has joined #fedora-meeting11:12
f13for now, we're just doing low tech fire off an email11:12
f13which is good, because it's results where none have been before, so it's absolutely an improvement11:13
viking_icewwoods: regarding more tests you can see if we can use any from the ltp.sf.net ( download for rhel5 and check the tests folder )11:13
adamwhow are the results looking?11:13
wwoodsugh, ltp11:13
viking_icewhich could spare us some writing11:13
viking_iceah ok11:13
wwoodswe've packaged up the ltp in the past11:13
wwoodsand tried to cram it into the RHTS framework11:13
wwoodsit's a horrible pain11:13
viking_icethat bad..11:14
wwoodsand those are generic linux system tests11:14
wwoodswe don't care about that yet11:14
jlaskaviking_ice: according to tehe project page ... the focus now seems to be on validating the rawhide bits (repos + trees)11:14
-!- valente [n=vali@] has quit ["Leaving."]11:14
wwoodswe care about specifically testing things like package sanity and repoclosure and whether kernel images / metadata are correct11:14
viking_icejlaska: yes just for da future I usually think a bit ahead11:14
-!- nicubunu [n=nicubunu@mail.apsro.com] has joined #fedora-meeting11:14
wwoodswe'll get around to doing functional system testing eventually11:14
wwoodsbut we're a long way from that11:14
wwoodswe *might* have a test that just runs the LTP and reports its results11:15
jlaskaviking_ice: right on11:15
viking_icewwoods: that does not prevent us from keeping ears and eyes open :)11:15
jlaskaf13: wwoods: would it capture things like this ... http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/rawhide-20090218/logs/i386.log (see last 2 lines)?11:15
wwoodswhat would it do if it did?11:16
jlaskanote a failure11:16
jlaskamissing images11:16
viking_icewwoods: if our testing suite can be used between distro we should ( when we are at that point ) perhaps reach out for collaboration between distro's in writing test cases more hands make an hard work an easy task11:16
jlaskadue to the failure noted in the logs above11:16
wwoodsno, I mean, where would it note the failure11:16
jlaska/tmp/buildinstall.tree.tn9wcm/mk-images: line 313: syntax error near unexpected token `)'11:16
jlaska/tmp/buildinstall.tree.tn9wcm/mk-images: line 313: `            atmel)'11:16
wwoodsright now the only thing the system is capable of is sending email11:16
f13jlaska: no, that's a functional testing error, not a broken dep11:16
jlaskawwoods: where does it note failures now?11:16
jlaskaf13: gotcha, thx11:17
wwoodsso it sends an email that says "pass" or "fail" near the bottom11:17
-!- valente [n=vali@] has joined #fedora-meeting11:17
jlaskaf13: does it make sense to have a future test for the presence of installation images?11:17
f13however if I write a hook to look at post-tree-compose, it would notice that the tree was missing images and error the test.11:17
f13jlaska: it wouldn't make sense in the post-repo-update case, but in post-tree-compose case11:17
-!- gregdek [n=gdk@cpe-024-088-244-139.nc.res.rr.com] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)]11:17
jlaskagotcha, great11:17
wwoodsbut yeah, we need a new watcher for that11:17
wwoodsand we can make a test that checks for the *result* of that error11:18
wwoodsi.e. no images11:18
f13which I think we already have in verify-tree11:18
f13I think our next watcher/test combo will likely be post-tree-compose + verify-tree11:18
wwoodsbut still, until we have a result server, the only output is email11:18
f13which is better than nothing (:11:19
jlaskado you guys have a priority in mind for future tests+watchers?11:19
wwoods(not strictly true - we actually output a directory of logs and test results)11:19
f13jlaska: not particularly11:19
wwoods(but the only thing that actually gets sent off the machine is output.log)11:19
f13jlaska: the first priority was $SOMETHING11:19
f13jlaska: after that...11:19
wwoodshighest priority is "whatever is useful and we already have code written for"11:20
jlaskaf13: heh, no doubt.  Nice work to you guys for getting a ball rolling :)11:20
viking_icewwoods: what's the workflow after the mail has been sent and it's a failure (:11:20
wwoodsjust so we can knock the harness and watcher and test design into shape11:20
wwoodsviking_ice: I dunno. fix it?11:20
wwoodswe'll worry about what to *do* with the results once we actually *have* results11:20
wwoodsright now we don't even *test* these things11:20
wwoodsso just getting notification is an improvement11:20
viking_iceah ok11:20
f13I think initially we need a autoqa-results@lists.fedoraproject.org to dump the results11:21
f13since they can be numerous11:21
wwoodsf13: agreed11:21
f13as we tweak things to be less annoying11:21
wwoodsplus that gives us a public archive of results11:21
jlaskaf13: wwoods shouldwe just setup a trac and mailing list for the hosted autoqa project?11:21
-!- mcepl [n=mcepl@49-117-207-85.strcechy.adsl-llu.static.bluetone.cz] has left #fedora-meeting []11:21
wwoodsjlaska: probably? seems like we could just use the existing fedora-qa trac11:21
f13but it will give us a public view into what's going on and help us poke other people in the eye to fix things11:21
wwoodsand just add an autoqa component11:21
f13seems right to me11:22
jlaskano skin in the game ... but, I'd vote for now to just keep it self-contained11:23
jlaskabut whatever folks feel is best, I create compoents etc...11:23
viking_icefedora-qa sounds good to me11:23
wwoodsI don't want to be admin on yet another trac instance11:23
wwoodsand since this stuff is almost specifically only useful for fedora-qa11:24
wwoodsit just makes sense to use that11:24
jlaskaI can see that ... okay11:24
-!- Parafeed [n=clive@abbey1.objectsoft-systems.ltd.uk] has joined #fedora-meeting11:24
jlaskashould we move all the code into fedora-qa too?11:25
wwoodsnot sure about that11:25
wwoodsgotta figure out how/if we can migrate it with its history intact11:25
wwoodsor if we can just have multiple git repos in one trac instance, or what11:25
wwoodsI'll look into it11:25
wwoodswe might just use it for ticketing/mailing list stuff11:26
f13the only thing that ties git repos into trac is for the browser, which gitweb/cgit is better for anyway11:26
f13so I wouldn't worry about multiple git repos being associated with a single trac instance, you just list them somewhere in the trac wiki11:26
f13the trac git plugin is flakey anyway11:27
wwoodsand mailing lists aren't handled by trac, right?11:27
* wwoods adds 'autoqa' component to fedora-qa trac11:27
f13wwoods: that is correct11:28
jlaskawwoods: ah, thx ... beat me to it11:28
f13trac has no concept of mailing lists11:28
wwoodsso, yeah, all we're really doing here is adding a component11:28
jlaskaI'll get a mailing list request in11:28
wwoodsdon't need to mess with the repo11:28
wwoodswe can use the main fedoraproject wiki11:28
viking_icehum cant we just resurrect the old one ( fedora-qa )11:28
wwoodsdefinitely not11:28
wwoodsthat was a user-oriented list11:28
viking_iceah ok11:29
wwoodspeople will be really unhappy if I start sending them 20 automated mails a day11:29
wwoodsbecause they subscribed to fedora-qa in 200611:29
viking_icetrue true11:29
jlaskaokay so ...11:29
jlaska * create a autoqa component in fedora-qa trac instance11:29
f13yeah, right now the post-repo-update sends one mail per repo per arch11:29
jlaska * send out infrastructure mailing list request for fedora-qa11:29
jlaskawwoods: you got the first?11:30
poelcatwhy can't you just flush the subscribers and repurpose the list? we did that for fedora-triage list11:30
wwoodsjlaska: yep, done11:30
* jlaska holds 11:30
wwoodspoelcat: because "fedora-qa" is not a good name11:30
viking_icegood point11:30
f13and fedora-qa is likely @redhat.com where we need to be creating lists at @fedoraproject.org or @fedorahosted.org11:30
wwoodswe're talking about a list to send at least 3, possibly up to 20+ emails a day11:30
viking_icefedora-testsuit ?11:31
jlaskafedora-qa would be the name we're going to use on hosted11:31
wwoodswhich are just logs of automatic test results11:31
jlaskalet's just use autoqa ...wwoods you can set me as the track admin if you want11:31
jlaskaif nothing else, it keeps it all in one place11:31
-!- dash123 [i=d2d43dfb@gateway/web/ajax/mibbit.com/x-c3d3b33c58cdac14] has joined #fedora-meeting11:31
wwoodsjlaska: hm? I already created the trac component and made myself owner11:31
jlaskaright, I mean for the mailing list11:32
wwoodsyeah, what f13 said11:32
jlaskano objections here11:32
f13basically the only reason we're creating a list is just to dump results11:32
f13its not a discussion list11:33
f13that can continue to happen on fedora-test-list and/or fedora-devel-list11:33
-!- balor [n=balor@] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)]11:33
-!- JSchmitt [n=s4504kr@p4FDD1611.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #fedora-meeting11:33
wwoodsit's really just so people can subscribe to the results and we get a public archive11:33
wwoodsa mailing list might not be ideal, but when all we have is hammers, every problem looks like a nail11:34
viking_icecould we hook up somekind of rss subscription option to it11:34
wwoodshm. does mailman do RSS feeds?11:34
-!- alexxed [n=alex@dyn-] has joined #fedora-meeting11:34
f13wwoods: you can get email2rss feeds hooked up11:35
f13I don't think mailman does that itself11:35
wwoodshrm. maybe we really just want it to generate results and an RSS feed.11:36
wwoodsactually! that'd be a super-simple basic implementation of the results server11:36
wwoodsa big dumb RSS feed of the results/logs submitted11:36
f13as soon as you do that, somebody is going to ask for an rss2email instance of it (:11:36
adamwthat would be me11:37
f13lets stick with email for now, since it works today11:37
* jlaska nods11:37
adamwrss is good for stuff where I only care about the last day11:37
adamwi can stick it in firefox11:37
-!- bristot [n=bristot@galileo.intelbras.com.br] has joined #fedora-meeting11:37
adamwbut it doesn't really fit my (or probably other people's) workflows for longer term stuff.11:37
wwoodsright. we'll stick with email and I'll probably do a webui/rss feed for the first implementation of the results server11:38
wwoodsso that's autoqa so far11:38
wwoodsspeaking of webui and results servers. shall we talk about nitrate for a moment?11:38
-!- wwoods changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: Fedora QA Meeting | nitrate11:38
viking_iceI say not to posting results in wiki I just dont think wiki is a result holder11:38
adamwand who's going to reply to that lovely email we got? :)11:39
wwoodsviking_ice: definitely not11:39
wwoodsbasically, we got an update about nitrate status11:39
jlaskawwoods: can we hold off on a nitrate update until we have some information to share11:39
viking_icenext meeting ?11:39
jlaskawe're navigating through some internal issues around resources for the nitrate project ... I expect to have more on that by next meeting11:40
viking_iceI personally see something like a bodhi like for results and instead of karma points just worked did not work11:40
-!- spoleeba [n=one@fedora/Jef] has joined #fedora-meeting11:40
wwoodsyeah, really just wanted to mention that nitrate is not going to magically appear anytime soon11:41
jlaskaadamw: I've got that mail11:41
jlaskaadamw: but may solicit your assistance :)11:41
viking_icewell more like f12 f1311:41
viking_icef13: are you prepared for f1311:41
-!- stickster_ [n=npfrield@ip72-205-14-2.dc.dc.cox.net] has joined #fedora-meeting11:42
jlaskait all depends on available resources, until I get more info ... it's too hard to nail a date11:42
-!- deca [n=deca@host86-164-180-127.range86-164.btcentralplus.com] has joined #fedora-meeting11:42
-!- fab [n=bellet@monkey.creatis.insa-lyon.fr] has quit ["Leaving"]11:43
wwoodsso yes, jlaska's on top of the situation. that's all for now about nitrate.11:43
-!- wwoods changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: Fedora QA Meeting | test day11:44
jlaskain the meantime, I've been discussing with the laptop.org folks (Mel Chua) their experiences with test case/results mgmt11:44
adamwworking in perfect harmony there, guys ;)11:44
wwoodsheh! sorry11:44
jlaskaI can present moer on that later if folks are interested ... this is mainly intended as a short term solution for fcami's needs (https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-February/msg00756.html)11:44
adamwit does seem like something that would be very welcome, though11:45
adamwtrying to write instructions as to how to send in test results for the upcoming test day royally sucked11:45
-!- warren [n=warren@redhat/wombat/warren] has quit ["Leaving"]11:45
-!- wwoods changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: Fedora QA Meeting | nitrate / test case/results management11:45
adamw"just edit the table and do it how i did" isn't great11:45
wwoodsyeah, it's been a long-standing problem11:45
jlaskawwoods: sorry, we can postpone the semantic for the end if you like11:45
-!- drago01 [n=linux@chello062178124130.3.13.univie.teleweb.at] has quit [Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)]11:45
wwoodsunfortunately there aren't any obviously great solutions11:45
wwoodsno, sorry, I thought "hold off on talking about nitrate" meant we should move to the next topic11:46
wwoodsbut this is important stuff11:46
viking_iceI think we should be working at distro independent solution or atleast host that system for all distro's so we can spread the test writing an test cases and hopefully get more hands on writing them11:46
adamwthe process in the laptop.org thing looks workable11:46
adamwthat's http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Reporting_test_results11:46
-!- warren [n=warren@nat/redhat/x-7d1f93be80bad6ef] has joined #fedora-meeting11:47
jlaskaright ... I summarized their thoughts in my note if anyone wants a quick read  ...https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-February/msg00756.html11:47
jlaskamediawiki is great for content ... so it seems to be a good fit for writing plans and cases for both groups11:47
viking_iceevery distro and application benefits from a central point of origin regarding testing test cases11:48
wwoodsso, are they pretty happy with this solution?11:48
-!- stickster_ is now known as stickster11:48
adamwerk, brb11:48
jlaskawwoods: like anything, pros and cons11:48
-!- stickster_afk [n=pfrields@fedora/stickster] has quit [Nick collision from services.]11:48
wwoodsit certainly looks like it would fill our needs and I know we've got some expertise running mediawiki instances...11:48
jlaskathe biggest con is that the semantic extension has a performance impact on the entire wiki11:48
adamwviking_ice: i like the idea, but i'm not sure if this would be a case where bringing even more people on board would make the process even messier...11:48
viking_iceadamw: then let's approach it from the other end11:49
viking_icecome up with a solution host it on a neutral ground and offer them to participate11:49
viking_iceI'm sure a lot of distro's would rather want to use a central point then trying to come up with something on their own like we are faced with now11:50
jlaskawe're investing in the process side of the house right now with adamw, viking_ice and company driving the wiki cleanup ... our test plan/case organization along with test days.  I'm really pleased with how those are maturing.  That elephant in the room is those darn'd results11:51
viking_iceI say let's use bodhi like system11:51
viking_iceui friendly11:51
-!- kital [n=Joerg_Si@fedora/kital] has quit [Remote closed the connection]11:52
wwoodseasier said than done, of course11:52
viking_iceif we break things down what does the tester need to report? He just need to report if the test was successful or not and if not a bug number11:52
viking_iceno more no less11:52
viking_icehe can write his life story on a blog11:53
-!- kital [n=Joerg_Si@fedora/kital] has joined #fedora-meeting11:53
adamwviking_ice: well, not always11:53
adamwviking_ice: take the 20 second boot test day for e.g.11:53
adamwviking_ice: the test cases aren't pass/fail11:53
-!- kital [n=Joerg_Si@fedora/kital] has quit [Remote closed the connection]11:53
adamwthe test cases produce results in the form of a file, which you have to provide11:53
jlaskaadamw: viking_ice: yeah ... the 20second boot test cases could possibly fall into the performance tests category11:53
viking_icethe result for those test cases are meaningless if the kernel team has not been contacted and asked to produce an debug info free kernel11:54
jlaskathere is some scrubbing of the results before you can assert pass/fail11:54
-!- drago01 [n=linux@chello062178124130.3.13.univie.teleweb.at] has joined #fedora-meeting11:54
viking_icemean from the 20second boot11:54
adamwbut otoh, the laptop.org system basically does what you say11:54
adamwdid you look at the screenshot?11:54
viking_icedid anybody contact the kernel team to come up a with a kernel for this test day11:55
jlaskaadamw: right11:55
adamwviking_ice: we're not on that topic yet11:55
-!- Pikachu_2014 [n=Pikachu_@81-66-20-24.rev.numericable.fr] has joined #fedora-meeting11:55
adamwwell, OK, we're running out of time anyway :\11:56
jlaskathe immediate problem I was investigating with the semantic route was to provide fcami with an interim solution for organizing results for the Xorg test effort11:56
adamwwhat's the conclusion on this whole topic? do we like the laptop.org system? I do11:56
-!- kiilerix [n=mk11@cpe.ge-1-1-0-787.alb2nqu1.customer.tele.dk] has joined #fedora-meeting11:56
adamwit's simple, does what we need, and we don't have to write any code11:56
jlaskaI do ... but there are caveats that I'll need to discuss with infrastructure folks11:57
adamwwe can talk to the Wiki guys about whether they'd prefer we attach it to the main wiki or create a special wiki instance11:57
jlaskathe "off-the-shelf" aspect is *very* appealing11:57
jlaskaI'll kick off a thread on the infrastructure list to see if we can identify if any blockers exist for that solution11:57
jlaskaokay ... any other thoughts?   Should we move on to tomorrows Test Day?11:58
adamwyes, let's11:58
wwoodssounds good to me11:58
adamwso :)11:59
-!- wwoods changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: Fedora QA Meeting | test day11:59
adamwviking_ice: to answer your question, afaik, no. i'm not convinced that's a huge problem, though. the impact of debugging stuff is imho rather overstated, and the point of the test day isn't to get absolute benchmarks per se, but to identify bottlenecks so performance can be improved11:59
-!- pingou [n=Pingou@fedora/pingou] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)]11:59
jlaskaviking_ice: I haven't heard from the devel + qa teams involved on whether that is an issue as well12:00
adamwdebugging-enabled packages should make everything slower at roughly the same rate - they won't cause bottlenecks to exist that wouldn't exist in debugging-disabled builds12:00
adamwso the results should still be valid.12:00
wwoodsright, the debugging overhead should be the same for all testers12:00
-!- nicubunu [n=nicubunu@mail.apsro.com] has quit ["Fading into sunset"]12:01
f13we're not looking to see if we've hit 20 seconds yet, we're looking to identify the bottlenecks12:01
adamwi'd like to ask, does everyone think the current info on the test day is good enough?12:01
* jlaska very pleased with format12:01
adamwit's one of the topics i have good hopes for 'community' involvement in, as it's the kind of thing people tend to care about12:01
wwoodsmy only question so far is: why are the test cases still under QA/XXX instead of in the QA: namespace?12:01
adamwso i made an effort to clean it up, and i promoted it via blog and fedoraforums12:01
adamwwwoods: er. didn't know they were supposed to be there :) they can be moved, i don't think i did any external links to the cases.12:02
jlaskaadamw: oh good, thanks on the blog post!12:02
adamwall the existing test cases I could find in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Test_Cases were under QA/ , so I just followed that.12:03
wwoodstestcases, generally, should stay out of the main namespace, since we don't want to clutter search results12:03
viking_icewell if we are going to get some accurate readings we need that kernel to see where we are at this point + I would believe the maintainer(s) should be aware bottleneck where the bottlenecks are and was just asking for the where we are at this point there also have been several threads on devel regarding this so as a say the maintainer(s) should know where to look to cut boot time12:03
jlaskawwoods: adamw: this is where the Forms extension helps ... it hides much of the "where to file" test case stuff12:04
jlaskaadamw: yeah I haven't migrated all the old test cases yet :(12:04
adamwviking_ice: if they didn't want more data, they'd not have asked for a test day, presumably :)12:04
adamwso what would be an example of a 'good' location for a testcase now then?12:04
jlaskaone can argue that it shouldn't still have the "TestCases/"12:05
adamwno, that's a bad example, it's using fake directories. :)12:05
jlaskait's part of the name I konw12:05
adamwright. the wiki folks would argue that very loudly =)12:05
f13I would too12:05
-!- nphilipp [n=nils@nat/redhat/x-a806de4627c54100] has quit ["Leaving"]12:05
jlaskameh ... as long as it's in the QA: namespace ... it doesn't bother me what people call it12:06
f13QA:Assign_ext4_fs_with_mount_point  woudl be fine, and have it exist in Category:TestCase12:06
adamwok. anyhoo...we're off topic again12:06
viking_iceadamw: perhaps we would like to know where the 20 second feature is at this point hence we need to try it with a kernel and ( other items that might affect that result ) with debug output  set to off12:06
wwoodsviking_ice: we're ignoring kernel debugging stuff. the readings will still be *accurate*, since there's a known *certain* error12:07
jlaskaviking_ice: I've got confirmation from the maintainer that it's not a concern for tomorrow12:07
wwoodswe're not concerned with the actual final numeric result being accurate12:07
adamwviking_ice: i think the naming is a bit of a mistake, because putting an arbitrary number on it doesn't really make sense. fedora runs on a huge range of hardware, you can't put a single number on the boot time12:07
f13viking_ice: we're not to the point yet where features are supposed to be "testable", we're still gathering information to do the work to make them "testable"12:07
adamwviking_ice: the point of the project is just to make it faster.12:07
f13viking_ice: after beta, then it would be interesting to do timing tests with non-debug kernel to see if we've accomplished the 20second startup.12:07
-!- moixs [n=chatzill@] has joined #fedora-meeting12:07
wwoodswe're concerned about what parts we can speed up. turning debugging off is already a known factor12:08
wwoodswe're looking for new, unknown factors12:08
wwoodswith possible solutions12:08
adamw...like readahead should be ionice'd...sorry, i'll keep that for tomorrow. :)12:08
wwoodskernel debugging is known and has a known solution12:08
wwoodsso it's uninteresting12:08
jlaskaso for any lurkers ... please do drop by #fedora-qa tomorrow to help gather bootchart data :)12:10
viking_icebased on that the 20second startup should have been more generic like scrape as much seconds as possible during this release cycle of the boot time instead of nailing it to 20 seconds12:10
adamwviking_ice: that's my opinion, yeah. but i think putting a number on it is intended to gather more attention :)12:10
jlaska6 minute abs12:10
-!- dash__ [i=d2d43dfb@gateway/web/ajax/mibbit.com/x-bd304b14deadc302] has joined #fedora-meeting12:10
adamw"Make boot faster project" doesn't sound as edgy as "20 second boot project".12:10
adamwbut, bleh.12:10
viking_iceadamw: well that number can backfire if we dont make it..12:10
adamwoh, we can always make it. just throw hardware at it. =)12:11
wwoodstoo late now. don't get hung up on it.12:11
adamwif you stick a couple of SSDs in this system it'd probably be there already.12:11
f13jlaska: I've got 5 minute abs here.12:11
jlaskaf13: that comes in F12 :)12:11
adamwso, uh, yeah, my issue is just - can anyone see anything remaining that would block people from getting involved in this test day?12:11
dash__asl plzz??12:12
f13adamw: time?  (:12:12
viking_icehum where have I heard that before if code is not good enough just throw more hw at it12:12
jlaskaf13: we've got all day covered for CEST and EST12:12
adamwapart from the messiness of entering results (which we covered earlier), the other thing that stuck out was the bit where you install rawhide, which is something we talked about...12:12
dash__neone asl plzz?12:12
-!- dash__ [i=d2d43dfb@gateway/web/ajax/mibbit.com/x-bd304b14deadc302] has left #fedora-meeting []12:12
jlaskaf13: it's listed at the top (12:00 to 20:00 UTC (7am -> 3pm ET)) ... I'll update to include EST coverage12:12
adamwwell, that was bizarre.12:12
-!- dash123 [i=d2d43dfb@gateway/web/ajax/mibbit.com/x-c3d3b33c58cdac14] has quit ["http://www.mibbit.com ajax IRC Client"]12:12
f13I meant time as in I have none to give to the test day12:13
wwoodsI can probably run a couple tests12:13
wwoodsbut yeah, the instructions look good to me12:13
viking_iceCant we let test day's time a whole day and just say the feature owner/ maintainer will be available during this time12:13
jlaskaf13: ah gotcha ... folks are welcome to run through the procedures at any time ... we'll just have "folks on call" during the test day12:14
jlaskaviking_ice: that's what we have ... just depends on the TZ of the maintainer and test lead for the feature12:14
adamwthat should probably be written in the test day page, actually. i'll update it12:14
adamwf13: but yeah, you can do all the tests today and add your data to the table. ;)12:15
adamwwwoods: it took me about an hour and a half to do the whole set, and I was fiddling with things in the meantime.12:15
viking_icehum we need to expand the test lead to more people (spread across timezones ) so we can cover a whole day12:15
adamwviking_ice: the point is the developers, not the qa guys12:15
adamwviking_ice: there's usually only one or two devs associated with a given test day project12:15
adamwviking_ice: and they're not going to want to sit in IRC for a sixteen hour stretch12:16
viking_iceofcourse but the lead can gather results and feed back and pass it on to the maintainers when they become available12:16
adamwviking_ice: just for the qa group's input, we could probably cover a whole day, but unless it's a big dev group, the devs probably can't.12:16
viking_icenobody is asking them to12:16
viking_icethink of this as an assignment we collect them from the testers and hand them to the developers when they are available12:17
adamwthat might work for future days, we could discuss it when planning those...i guess it depends what the topic is and how the dev wants to structure the day12:17
jlaskaI've not yet found 1 way to run a test day that works for every test day.  It largely depends on the feature, the maintainer(s) involved, testers involved, tools available etc...12:18
jlaskawe've done a great job though of getting a consistent look'n'feel on the Test Day process pages and the individual test day event pages12:18
adamwyeah, i think that's right. for e.g., for something highly technical like iSCSI last week, it'd be difficult to do anything meaningful without the dev there.12:18
adamwbut for something broader like this, we could probably cover it for a longer period.12:19
f13also having it be a "test day" drives excitement and interest and participation, rather than "test week" where you get "oh I'll get around to it at some point..."12:19
jlaskaany other test day thoughts/concerns around the wiki page content?12:19
wwoodsnothing from me12:20
jlaskaadamw: you pleased with the feedback on the current state of the event wiki?12:20
adamwjlaska: no-one said it sucked, so yeah. =)12:20
jlaskahah, great ;)12:20
jlaskaokay ... next topic then?12:20
wwoodsthat's all I had12:20
-!- wwoods changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: Fedora QA Meeting | misc.12:21
wwoodsanything else?12:21
jlaskawwoods: I'd like to reserver 10 mins at the next meeting to discuss "QA group activities + goals discussion" - https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-February/msg00707.html12:21
jlaskaalong with a test case mgmt update12:21
adamwi'm good for now, just please everyone get involved with the test day tomorrow, if we at least have a table with results from all the regulars (especially redhat.com people :>) it'll encourage more people to join in12:22
adamwsame reason street buskers put a few quarters in the hat to start with =)12:22
viking_icei'll probably be offline for a week12:22
-!- dkovalsk [n=dkovalsk@r11eu187.net.upc.cz] has quit [Read error: 113 (No route to host)]12:22
adamwviking_ice: shooting arrows into things?12:22
viking_icewell that's just for the weekend12:23
adamwhehe, have fun, don't do a Cheney12:23
jlaskaviking_ice: good luck!12:23
viking_icewill be the first of the Iceland so I'm already a champ12:23
wwoodsviking_ice: heh! congrats!12:23
* viking_ice since he's the only one competing from Iceland 12:23
wwoodsjlaska: okay, noted agenda items for next week12:24
-!- MostafaDaneshvar [n=MostafaD@unaffiliated/mostafadaneshvar] has joined #fedora-meeting12:24
wwoods- Test case management update12:25
-!- themayor [n=jack@dsl081-200-011.nyc2.dsl.speakeasy.net] has joined #fedora-meeting12:25
wwoods- qa group activities + goals12:25
wwoods- raise a glass for viking-ice shooting arrows into things12:25
wwoods- feature test plan rundown12:26
wwoodsthere's a loooot of features 12:26
wwoodsand we're gonna need to make sure we can test them very soon12:26
wwoodsanything else for next week?12:26
jlaskamaybe a brief autoqa update?12:26
wwoodsoh right12:26
wwoods- autoqa status report12:27
jlaskathen the goal for all of us ... to pack that into 1 hour of fun12:27
* jlaska thinks about a 5 lbl bag12:28
wwoodsyeah I suspect we may need to just split up the features and work on them during the rest of the week12:28
jlaskawwoods: perhaps we spend that time to review a game plan? dunno12:28
* f13 goes to get food12:28
wwoodsjlaska: yeah, we'll work something out by next week12:28
wwoodsanyway, that's all I've got 12:29
wwoodsif there's nothing else, let's call it done12:29
-!- CheekyBoinc [n=CheekyBo@fedora/CheekyBoinc] has joined #fedora-meeting12:30
wwoodsokay - thanks all12:30
wwoodsI'll post a log and a summary shortly12:30
--- Log closed Wed Feb 18 12:31:02 2009

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!