15:08:27 <vhumpa1> #startmeeting Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting
15:08:27 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon May 30 15:08:27 2011 UTC.  The chair is vhumpa1. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:08:27 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
15:08:28 * j_dulaney has never chaired a meeting before
15:08:47 * vhumpa1 neither
15:09:33 <vhumpa1> Okay, let's do the roll-up
15:09:53 <vhumpa1> Something tells me it won't be big :-)
15:10:18 * j_dulaney is here
15:10:52 <vhumpa1> Anybody else present?
15:10:58 * Nushio is present
15:11:18 <vhumpa1> Nushio: greetings
15:11:48 <vhumpa1> #meetingname Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting
15:11:48 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_quality_assurance_meeting'
15:12:19 <j_dulaney> #topic Security Lab Tests
15:12:22 <vhumpa1> If that is let's start walking through the proposed agenda
15:12:44 <vhumpa1> #topic Security test cases from athmane
15:13:06 <j_dulaney> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_OpenVAS
15:13:07 <vhumpa1> Athmane?
15:13:15 <j_dulaney> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Rkhunter
15:13:23 <j_dulaney> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Nikto
15:13:30 <j_dulaney> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_HTTPing
15:14:08 <j_dulaney> I don't see anything specifically wrong with them.
15:14:42 <vhumpa1> #addchair j_dulaney
15:15:03 <j_dulaney> I reckon I should #info those
15:15:16 <vhumpa1> j_dulaney: good idea
15:15:36 <j_dulaney> #info https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_HTTPing https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Nikto https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Rkhunter https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_OpenVAS
15:16:04 <j_dulaney> Testing in each case seems straightforward.
15:16:11 <vhumpa1> j_dulaney: Looks like I need to add you as a chairman
15:16:31 <vhumpa1> #chair j_dulaney
15:16:31 <zodbot> Current chairs: j_dulaney vhumpa1
15:16:40 <vhumpa1> #info https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_HTTPing https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Nikto https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Rkhunter https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_OpenVAS
15:17:49 <vhumpa1> Okay, let's move on. This one is likely going to be short :) And a bust :)
15:18:14 <j_dulaney> #topic Release criteria updates
15:19:07 <vhumpa1> Would be great if we had adamw here
15:19:45 <vhumpa1> Anybody wants to sum up the Release Criteria updates here?
15:22:07 <j_dulaney> Looking
15:22:49 <vhumpa1> I see that F16 criteria pages have been created http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_16_Alpha_Release_Criteria
15:22:56 <vhumpa1> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_16_Beta_Release_Criteria
15:23:04 <j_dulaney> Indeed
15:23:05 <vhumpa1> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_16_Final_Release_Criteria
15:23:20 <j_dulaney> Have they been updated with the new criteria?
15:23:26 <j_dulaney> C'est la question
15:23:59 <vhumpa1> to quote adamw: two more criteria agreed in the October 2010 discussion that we failed to put in
15:24:04 <vhumpa1> in the final
15:24:26 <j_dulaney> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-May/099787.html
15:24:34 <vhumpa1> alpha: add logger criterion recently discussed on list
15:25:03 <vhumpa1> And the beta criteria remain unchanged
15:25:47 <j_dulaney> Final, no Other menu has been removed
15:26:16 <vhumpa1> Also: No application may unintentionally appear twice in the menus. In particular, items under System must not appear under Applications in the Final
15:26:16 <j_dulaney> I should say, the criteria that there be no 'Other' menu.
15:27:00 <vhumpa1> Although I am not sure whether these are not the ones already changed in F15. Any idea about those talked about " in October"?
15:27:40 <j_dulaney> Can't remember, but I think they've been propogated
15:27:49 <adamw> yo
15:28:02 <adamw> oh sorry folks i didn't realize someone was running a meeting! my bad
15:28:06 <j_dulaney> Adamw saves us from the insanity
15:28:06 <vhumpa1> Hey adam!
15:28:13 <vhumpa1> Wanna take over? :)
15:28:19 <adamw> no, carry on
15:28:32 <vhumpa1> Make it a little less of an catastrophe? :)
15:28:38 <adamw> hey, looks fine to me
15:28:49 <adamw> i think you summed up the updates fine
15:29:05 <vhumpa1> okay, do you have any notes on the release criteria revisions?
15:29:08 <j_dulaney> Adamw: these release criteria changes that happened in October, have they been propogated to F16?
15:29:12 <adamw> there'll probably be more coming, we should go back over the suggestions from the desktop team
15:29:33 <adamw> yes, that's where i put them - i didn't change the f15 criteria, there's no point since f15 is done
15:29:41 <j_dulaney> Indeed
15:30:48 <vhumpa1> #info a new criterion: A spin-kickstarts package which contains the exact kickstart files used  to build the release must be present in the release repository. The  included kickstarts must define the correct set of release repositories
15:31:23 <vhumpa1> #info a new final criterion: A fedora-release package and a generic-release package appropriately  versioned and containing the correct names, information and repository  configuration for a final Fedora release (as opposed to a pre-release)  must be present in the release repository
15:31:38 <adamw> one thing with all these new criteria is to make sure we have validation tests that cover them: we have https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/151 for that
15:32:31 <vhumpa1> #action make sure we have tests for the new criteria: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/151
15:32:32 <j_dulaney> I've a quick proposal:  Have a criterion that forbids names that are too similar.
15:32:55 <adamw> names, as in...menu entry names?
15:33:03 <j_dulaney> adamw:  Indeed
15:33:15 <adamw> i definitely like the idea of trying to squelch annoyingly-similar names
15:33:37 <j_dulaney> For instance, as has been recently pointed out, Software Update and Software Updates
15:33:45 <adamw> personally i think the desktop criteria kinda go too far as is, but they came in from the desktop team so i kept them...
15:33:49 <adamw> yeah, and there's Terminal / Terminal
15:33:59 <adamw> and some of the system-config-* apps have the same name as GNOME control panel applets
15:34:05 * nirik is still sad Xfce named their terminal Terminal. ;(
15:34:07 <adamw> (Date & Time is one I think)
15:34:12 <j_dulaney> Indeed
15:34:16 <vhumpa1> also KDE system monitor has the same name
15:34:26 <vhumpa1> Although I doubt we can do anything about that
15:34:30 <adamw> personally i'm not sure if the release criteria is the right place for it, but we could ask desktop team what they think
15:34:54 <adamw> and maybe try and get the desktops to work together and compromise a bit (as I guess it'll be hard to choose who 'wins' the generic name for things)
15:34:57 <j_dulaney> #action Ask desktop team about changing similar menu names
15:35:04 <vhumpa1> adamw: At least we should make sure that this doesnt happen in the fresh Desktop installation
15:35:23 <j_dulaney> Indeed.
15:35:33 <adamw> yeah i'd definitely like to avoid it
15:35:35 <j_dulaney> There are plenty of instances within just Gnome
15:35:42 <vhumpa1> Live image one... hard to do anything about custom DVD installs
15:36:14 <adamw> that might be a good standard to try and meet, yeah
15:36:29 <j_dulaney> +1 for such
15:36:31 <adamw> i'll take an action item to talk to the desktop teams about it if you like? or anyone else can
15:37:03 <j_dulaney> #action adamw to talk to desktop teams about too-similar menu names
15:37:30 <vhumpa1> adamw: I am little less around here nowadays but if you want, I can do that too
15:37:47 <adamw> i'll chat to you about it after the meeting maybe
15:37:52 <vhumpa1> Okay
15:38:00 <adamw> (quickly, i know it's close to leaving time :>)
15:38:16 <vhumpa1> adamw: I am not even working today :)
15:38:23 <adamw> "i'm not even supposed to BE here today!"
15:38:52 <adamw> i do have one topic if we're done with the criteria, btw
15:38:59 <vhumpa1> okay, anything else on the topic?
15:38:59 <j_dulaney> Right
15:39:26 <j_dulaney> Nothing
15:39:30 <vhumpa1> Next one should be "Last call for F-15 QA retrospective input", but we can put yours in there right now
15:39:39 <adamw> no, that's fine, i'll go at the end
15:39:55 <vhumpa1> Okay
15:40:01 <j_dulaney> #topic Last call for F-15 QA retrospective input
15:40:20 <vhumpa1> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_15_QA_Retrospective
15:40:40 <j_dulaney> I'm assuming this means that if we haven't dropped said input soon, it will be ignored
15:40:49 <vhumpa1> There is where we put notes on all that we think went well and wrong around the F15 cycle
15:41:32 <adamw> j_dulaney: pretty much - jlaska usually takes the input, summarizes it, and turns it into trac tickets, and i guess this means he's planning to do that soon
15:41:46 <vhumpa1> So by the topic name :-) I guess now is the time for anybody to sugest some additions
15:42:03 * j_dulaney has nothing new
15:42:51 <adamw> well, also it's just a heads-up to get anything in in the next few days, doesn't have to happen during the meeting :)
15:42:59 <adamw> i think i have all my stuff in there already.
15:43:15 * vhumpa1 things it looks pretty solid by now
15:43:22 <vhumpa1> thinks^^
15:43:49 * vhumpa1 sticks his head in the sand :-)
15:44:02 <j_dulaney> See any oil?
15:44:18 <vhumpa1> I wish :-)
15:44:21 <adamw> hehe
15:44:48 <vhumpa1> Right, looks like we can move on
15:44:54 <mathezula> what's the topic for this meeting?  its my first fedora-meeting
15:45:02 <vhumpa1> #topic AutoQA updates
15:45:09 <j_dulaney> mathezula:  Fedora QA
15:45:23 <mathezula> pertaining to packages only or support practices?
15:45:34 <adamw> mathezula: we cover various topics
15:45:45 <adamw> this bit is a little update from the autoqa team about what they've been working on lately
15:45:51 <vhumpa1> mathezula: pretty much anything around Fedora life cycle
15:46:06 <vhumpa1> Bad boy Kamil for not being here :-)
15:46:08 <adamw> usually kamil paral does it, but i think he's away today...so i guess vhumpa will?
15:46:13 <vhumpa1> but I think i can do some
15:46:24 <mathezula> i have some concerns about operator behavior in the main fedora support channel on this network. is this covered? (p.s. are you adam williamson? :D :D)
15:47:33 <adamw> mathezula: yes, that's me, and no, we don't supervise #fedora
15:47:47 <adamw> mathezula: that would probably be something to bring up with the Board, the supervision of #fedora is a bit...unclear
15:47:50 <vhumpa1> #info We have still been working on the revised logs and also merged depcheck "pretty" by jskladan into pretty branch.
15:48:03 <j_dulaney> Noice
15:48:06 <adamw> yay
15:48:20 <mathezula> alrighty.  im trying to figure out how that all works. bear with me while i ooze newbiness.
15:48:21 * j_dulaney likes the html pretties
15:48:29 <vhumpa1> #info basically we have been finishing up stuff that we have been working on for three weeks now
15:48:37 <j_dulaney> mathezula It's all good
15:48:38 <mathezula> also adamw i love your work.  you're a role model in the community.
15:49:10 <j_dulaney> vhumpa1:  Do you reckon a new release may be forthcoming?
15:49:14 <vhumpa1> #info pretty log has been changed to html and we have added a possibility for highlighting which will be used especially from depcheck
15:49:26 <j_dulaney> How's the bodhi spam situation?
15:49:38 <vhumpa1> j_dulaney: I think we are up to 0.5.0 this week
15:49:45 <j_dulaney> Noice
15:49:53 <vhumpa1> I am not sure on the spam reduction though
15:50:09 <vhumpa1> Tim has been working on that quite separately
15:50:21 <adamw> okay
15:50:28 * j_dulaney wonders if y'all should try to get that in
15:50:31 <adamw> tell him to be more sociable :D
15:50:56 <vhumpa1> So, 0.5.0 really depends on how far that is and how the merge will end up
15:51:21 <vhumpa1> But it's just a gut feeling, that it's doing good :)
15:52:15 <j_dulaney> Noice
15:52:33 <vhumpa1> #action get back at Tim for the spam reduction updates and and a time estimate of merging that together with the logging changes in the master so we can release
15:53:14 <vhumpa1> Quite likely that kparal is well informed on this
15:53:39 * j_dulaney would suspect so; kparal knows things
15:53:46 <adamw> cool, sounds like it's all moving in the right direction
15:54:06 * vhumpa1 plus 1
15:54:34 <vhumpa1> as far as I am concerned, we can move on
15:54:50 <adamw> alrighty
15:54:56 <j_dulaney> #topic Open Discussion (Put your topic here)
15:55:07 <j_dulaney> Did I spell that right?
15:55:16 <vhumpa1> j_dulaney: Ah, we're here already? YAY
15:55:16 <adamw> yup
15:55:22 <adamw> so i guess i'll put mine in here
15:55:26 <vhumpa1> adamw: your topic
15:55:42 <adamw> we have an out-of-cycle test day coming up soon, for IPv6
15:55:50 <adamw> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Test_Day:2011-06-08_IPv6
15:55:53 <j_dulaney> #topic IPv6 Test Day
15:55:59 <adamw> and trac ticket https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/192
15:56:19 <vhumpa1> #info wiki page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Test_Day:2011-06-08_IPv6
15:56:20 <adamw> it's World IPv6 Day on june 8 so i got a proposal from within RH to have a fedora IPv6 test day - it seemed like a good idea
15:56:29 <adamw> so it's being put together via trac ticket and wiki page as usual
15:56:37 <fenrus02> w00t!!
15:56:57 <adamw> the people putting it together aren't super plugged in to the fedora process so it'd be good to have people from our side just checking in with the trac and wiki page and helping to make sure everything's ready
15:57:20 <vhumpa1> #info World IPv6 Day is happening on june 8 so we have decided to have a fedora IPv6 test day as well
15:57:26 <adamw> last time i checked the instructions were there but needing prettying up and separating out into test cases, and it would be good if people could go through them ahead of time and see if they're actually complete and easy to follow
15:58:12 <adamw> so yeah, just a heads-up for people to check out the trac page and wiki and help out if you can :) also of course publicity is great, tell your friends
15:58:24 <j_dulaney> Indeed
15:58:34 <vhumpa1> adamw: Indeed we'll keep that in mind!
15:58:43 * nirik notes fedoraproject should be ipv6 ready... web pages, etc.
15:59:38 <adamw> cool
15:59:57 <adamw> that would be worth noting in the trac ticket
16:00:10 * j_dulaney will take that
16:00:44 <adamw> thanks
16:01:19 <vhumpa1> #action Everybody to keep in mind that ipv6 test day and trac ticket might need some prettying up and separating out into test cases and generally we should go through them to see if they are complete in time
16:02:25 <j_dulaney> Done
16:02:42 <vhumpa1> Did all these infos and actions get noted? Not sure whether zodbot is not supposed to reply them
16:02:54 <adamw> as long as you're a chair it should be fine
16:03:00 <adamw> zodbot doesn't announce them
16:03:05 <vhumpa1> okay, thanks
16:03:13 <vhumpa1> #topic Open discussion
16:03:51 <j_dulaney> Adamw:  Have you heard from pbrobinson regaurding the Sugar NM issue?
16:03:52 <vhumpa1> Anything anybody would like to bring up?
16:04:06 <j_dulaney> #topic Sugar NetworkManager
16:04:14 <adamw> yes
16:04:23 <j_dulaney> What has he said?
16:04:46 <adamw> well, just what's on the bug
16:04:58 <adamw> "It should be changed. I'm going to produce another package and fix the live cd issues tomorrow morning and publish a test livecd"
16:05:04 <j_dulaney> Ah
16:05:05 <adamw> but that hasn't arrived yet..
16:05:15 <j_dulaney> And that's been a couple of days
16:05:23 <adamw> so i may try and merge in your (j_dulaney) change myself and test that at least
16:05:27 * j_dulaney was wondering what had happened
16:05:35 <adamw> i don't know what the live image fixes are, so i can't do that bit, but i can test the nm fix at least
16:05:48 <adamw> yeah me too, i haven't heard from him since then; he may have just got busy, it happens
16:06:17 <j_dulaney> Adamw:  I'd appreciate that
16:06:25 * j_dulaney can't spell, and never could
16:06:55 * vhumpa1 welcomes j_dulaney to the club
16:07:10 <adamw> eyem knot inn dat klub
16:07:26 <j_dulaney> Yay.  Does this mean I get a shiny sertifkate?
16:07:42 <adamw> yes, except they can't spell your address right so it never arrives
16:08:31 <j_dulaney> Anywho, that's all I had
16:08:42 <j_dulaney> #topic Open Discussion
16:09:03 <adamw> i think that's all i have too
16:09:13 * vhumpa1 vhumpa didn't really have anything at all since he just jumped in for some lurking while studying for exam :)
16:09:26 * j_dulaney moves that we wrap things, he is hungry
16:09:36 <vhumpa1> +1
16:09:59 <j_dulaney> #endmeeting