[17:00] <marjo> #startmeeting QA Team
[17:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 11:00. The chair is marjo.
[17:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[17:00] <marjo> Agenda:
[17:00] <marjo>     * SRU testing -- sbeattie (Steve Beattie)
[17:00] <marjo>     * Bugday highlights -- pedro
[17:00] <marjo>     * QA mailing list -- fader
[17:00] <marjo> Anybody want to add to the agenda?
[17:01] <marjo> [TOPIC] SRU testing -- sbeattie (Steve Beattie)
[17:01] <MootBot> New Topic:  SRU testing -- sbeattie (Steve Beattie)
[17:02] <sbeattie> SRU activity has slowed about, perhaps due to the US holiday last week.
[17:02] <sbeattie> SRU Activity report for the past week (since 2009-11-24):
[17:02] <sbeattie> * karmic: 11 new packages in -proposed (app-install-data-partner, conduit, devicekit-disks, evolution-indicator, iriverter, linux-firmware, muse, openafs, samba, telepathy-gabble, xorg-server) and 10 pushed to -updates (deja-dup, eucalyptus, gdm, kdeedu, kdeplasma-addons, treeline, tzdata, uim, ureadahead, xorg)
[17:02] <sbeattie> * jaunty: 2 new packages in -proposed (conduit, openafs) and 1 pushed to -updates (tzdata)
[17:02] <sbeattie> * intrepid: 1 new package in -proposed (pidgin) and 1 pushed to -updates (tzdata)
[17:02] <sbeattie> * hardy: 2 packages pushed to -updates (sun-java6, tzdata)
[17:02] <sbeattie> * dapper: 1 package pushed to -updates (langpack-locales)
[17:02] <sbeattie> Thanks to Morten Frisch, bluenibor, VPablo, Alastair Carey, Mario Limonciello, Pjotr12345,  Steve Dodier,  Zaar Hai, Evan Broder, Fabrice Coutadeur, Philip Muskovac, and Jonathan Thomas for testing proposed updates.
[17:04] <sbeattie> That's all I have on the topic for this week.
[17:04] <marjo> sbeattie: thx
[17:04] <marjo> [TOPIC] Bugday highlights -- pedro
[17:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  Bugday highlights -- pedro
[17:05] <pedro_> Tomorrow we're having our first Bug Day after coming back from UDS
[17:05] <pedro_> the target will be Ubuntu Translations https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugDay/20091203
[17:05] <pedro_> Thanks a lot to Victor Vargas (aka Kamusin) who organized mostly all of it
[17:05] <marjo> Kamusin: thx!
[17:06] <pedro_> Next Week we're having a Compiz bug day and we are looking for more hands to organize it
[17:06] <pedro_> so if you have some time and want to learn how to organize a bug day just drop your name on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugDay/Planning
[17:07] <pedro_> also if you have some ideas about the next target don't be shy and add it to that page as well
[17:07]  * fagan will volunteer next week busy with college
[17:07] <pedro_> fagan, awesome! thanks
[17:07] <pedro_> marjo, that's all from here
[17:07] <marjo> fagan: thx; glad to know you have the right priorities!
[17:08] <fader_> marjo: I thought the right priorities were QA > sleep > food > studying
[17:08] <fader_> :)
[17:08] <pedro_> sleep? food? what for?
[17:08] <pedro_> :-P
[17:08] <fader_> Hehe
[17:08] <marjo> fader_: we need to talk privately :) for me to give you some needed advice
[17:08] <fagan> for me is food>college assignments>classes>everything else :D
[17:09] <marjo> [TOPIC] QA mailing list -- fader
[17:09] <MootBot> New Topic:  QA mailing list -- fader
[17:09] <fader_> So with our recent discussions around transparency and involving the community more, I have realized we don't have a good venue to discuss general QA topics
[17:10] <fader_> There is a QA team mailing list on LP, but it seems to be older and has some entry requirements:
[17:10] <fader_> (And I lost the URL, hang on :) )
[17:10] <fader_> https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-qa
[17:10] <marjo> fader_ : lack of sleep...
[17:10] <fader_> stgraber is the owner of this, so I was hoping he might be able to tell us a bit about the rationale behind it being somewhat restricted
[17:11] <fader_> And to see if anyone else thinks it would be useful to have a general QA mailing list to discuss what needs tested and how to improve practices
[17:11] <bdmurray> I was looking at this last week or so
[17:11] <davmor2> ubuntu-qa@lists.ubuntu.com this one you mean
[17:11] <ara> fader_, the team is moderated, but the list is open https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/Ubuntu-quality
[17:11] <fader_> ara: Ah, I interpreted the team being moderated to mean the list was as well, thanks
[17:12] <bdmurray> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-qa/2008-July/000166.html
[17:12] <marjo> fader_ : so no need for yet another mailing list, right?
[17:12] <fader_> Is this something we can/should point people to when they are interested in helping to test Ubuntu?  I'd be happy to help point people there and make announcements as we need tests
[17:12] <marjo> fader_: yes, please
[17:12] <davmor2> marjo: no just utilise the one we already have :D
[17:12] <fader_> marjo: I'd say no, assuming everyone is happy using this existing list
[17:12] <fagan> isnt it because we own the sru tools
[17:13] <marjo> that should be part of our community outreach for testing
[17:13] <fader_> Excellent, I'll send people there whenever they look like they can be tricked into helping us test. :D
[17:13] <ara> for the testing team we are going to have ubuntu-testing mailing list
[17:14] <marjo> ok, so from now on, we will use that list to get the word out to a broad audience
[17:14] <fader_> ara: What is the goal of that list?  How is it going to be different from the QA team list?
[17:14] <marjo> ara: can't you also announce to the qa list we're talking about? more, the merrier, no?
[17:14] <fagan> Id like to have one main list rather than a QA list and a testing list
[17:15] <fader_> +1, unless ara has a legitimate reason to split the two
[17:15] <ara> I wanted to have a sense of team, as the bugsquad. ubuntu-testing for team discussions
[17:15] <fagan> Fragmentation is bad when the teams are small
[17:15] <marjo> fagan: i'm thinking of the QA list as covering a broader audience, while the testing list is for testing only
[17:16] <marjo> fagan: but we want to expand the community from small to bigger
[17:16] <fader_> Is there anyone interested in the QA list that would not be interested in testing?
[17:16]  * fagan doesnt think so
[17:16] <marjo> i ASSume QA list > testing list, no?
[17:16] <fader_> I'd hate to have to join two lists and post/see the same information twice :)
[17:16] <marjo> fader_: oic
[17:16] <fagan> I think we should revisit it when the testing team gets bigger
[17:17] <fader_> Again, maybe I'm missing a use-case, but I agree with fagan on this one
[17:17] <ara> fader_, but, again, we can keep ubuntu-testing as internal discussion of the team
[17:17] <fagan> Most of us are on IRC anyway
[17:17] <fagan> I see ara's point though
[17:18] <ara> fader_, not for announcements, but for things like, who is going to update the wiki for blah, blah, blah
[17:18] <fader_> Ahh, I see -- so have the QA list be very general for announcements and such, but the 'real work' gets done on the testing list?
[17:18] <ara> fader_, the testing work yes
[17:19] <fagan> Sure then
[17:19] <marjo> i thot one of the problems we were trying to solve was to announce things like ISO testing and want to reach a broad audience?
[17:19] <fader_> ara: I see.  That sounds reasonable :)  I'd still personally vote for starting with one list and splitting off a second if it's needed, but I won't fight too hard. :)
[17:19] <marjo> therefore, use the QA list in addition to testing list
[17:19] <sbeattie> marjo: sure, that's a typical thing to announce.
[17:20] <fagan> +1 then too
[17:20] <fader_> marjo: My worry is that anyone who will do ISO testing needs to be on the testing list anyway, to coordinate
[17:20] <marjo> fader_ : yes, of course
[17:20] <sbeattie> personally, I'd like to see the QA team list get more discussion traffic as well.
[17:20] <marjo> so, your concern is the dup of info, right?
[17:21] <fader_> marjo: So basically, everyone has to be on both lists anyway, right?  That's what I'm trying to avoid, having two lists that are interdependent; why have them?
[17:21] <ara> I don't mind using ubuntu-qa list, I just prefer the -testing term :)
[17:21] <fader_> Heh so maybe a name change is in order :)
[17:21] <ara> fader_, no, no worries
[17:22] <ara> fader_, if it is going to be a testing discussion on it, ubuntu-qa seems good to me
[17:22] <marjo> ara: if that's the case, let's just use ubuntu-qa list
[17:22] <davmor2> Very quickly I think the ubuntu-qa mailing list was one of laserjocks implementations to improve qa involvement
[17:22] <marjo> davmor2: well then we've just rediscovered the original intent which remains the same today!
[17:22] <marjo> brilliant!
[17:22] <ara> davmor2, yes, but now it is just a list of mails from people asking for CDs :D
[17:22] <sbeattie> davmor2: the list predated the team, the team was the "improve involvement" bit.
[17:23] <davmor2> ubuntu-testing ties into the main irc channel etc so it might be better to drop the qa in favour of the general testing
[17:23] <marjo> davmor2: no!
[17:23] <fader_> davmor2: Or use #ubuntu-quality more :)
[17:23] <fagan> davmor2: QA is the umbrella for testing
[17:24] <marjo> to me, QA includes bug management and testing
[17:24] <marjo> fagan: agree!
[17:24] <fader_> At any rate, I think there is agreement that we should at least be using the list we have now, and that we might need a second one in the future.  I propose that we try to use the existing list and encourage people to sign up for it and discuss this further on-list as warranted.
[17:25] <fagan> fader_: +1
[17:25]  * fader_ hustles off to sign up for the mailing list.
[17:25] <marjo> fader_: just to be sure, what "list we have now" are you proposing?
[17:25] <fader_> marjo: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
[17:25] <fagan> ubuntu-qa marjo
[17:26] <marjo> ok, so the decision is:
[17:26] <marjo> Continue to use: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality for QA related announcements and discussions
[17:26] <marjo> everyone agree?
[17:26] <cr3> +1
[17:26] <fader_> +1
[17:26] <fagan> but we have to promote the list too
[17:27] <davmor2> +1
[17:27] <ara> +1
[17:27] <fagan> +1
[17:27] <fader_> fagan: Definitely! :)
[17:27] <on3_g> +1
[17:27] <bdmurray> +1
[17:27] <schwuk> +1
[17:27] <sbeattie> +1
[17:27] <pedro_> +1
[17:27] <marjo> fagan: yes, i think that was a major part of the problem; no promotion of the list, so it was not well used
[17:28] <marjo> anything else on this topic?
[17:28]  * fagan puts a planet post about the ubuntu-qa team on his todo list
[17:28] <fader_> marjo: Not from me; I'm happy.
[17:28] <fader_> fagan: Good idea; I'll blog about it as well.
[17:28] <marjo> fader_: thx for bringing it up and taking the lead
[17:28] <fader_> np
[17:29] <marjo> wow, such a lively discussion
[17:29] <marjo> i love it!
[17:29] <marjo> ok, any new topics for today?
[17:29] <davmor2> fader_, schwuk: should there be a quick link to the mailing list from the main ubuntu-qa page if there isn't one
=== DKcross is now known as TDKcross
[17:29] <fagan> I think for the launchpad team we should keep it moderated and maybe make a new team for beginners
[17:29] <fader_> davmor2: There's not now AFAIK...
[17:30] <fagan> Like what the docs team did a while back
[17:30] <on3_g> fagan: +1
[17:30] <schwuk> davmor2: ok
[17:30] <davmor2> it'll help promote it with a minimum of work
[17:31] <fader_> fagan: That might be a good topic to discuss on-list, as maybe someone can fill me in on the purpose of the group(s) there :)
[17:31] <on3_g> i think info for beginners is poor
[17:31] <marjo> fagan: can you please remind us of what the "docs team did"?
[17:31] <fader_> on3_g: +1
[17:31] <marjo> folks: remember one of the outcomes at UDS was:
[17:32]  * kamusin on3_g +1
[17:32] <marjo> make it simple for the community to get involved, step 1, 2, 3...
[17:32] <on3_g> and info for another distro flavors like xubuntu and kubuntu (especially) too
[17:32] <fagan> Well the documentations team has two parts the main team thats open and the commiters team for really active people it gives new contributes something to aim for
[17:32] <marjo> fagan: oic
[17:33] <on3_g> marjo: +1
[17:33] <marjo> and they find it to be effective?
[17:33] <fagan> Yep
[17:34] <fagan> Plus the moderated team can own SRU tools..etc
[17:34] <ara> in any case, I would keep the testing team for people willing to test
[17:34] <fagan> ara: thats a given
[17:34] <marjo> ara: agree
[17:34] <ScottK> Generally I  think it would be good if the QA team considers itself working on Ubuntu the project, not just Ubuntu the distro.
[17:35] <ScottK> That would encompass the other flavors as well (even if they get less resources from Canonical)
[17:35] <fagan> ScottK: we do test kubuntu and xubuntu as well
[17:35] <ScottK> fagan: I'm aware
=== TDKcross is now known as DKcross
[17:36] <ScottK> It's just that when you say it's the Ubuntu QA team, think of Ubuntu the project, not Ubuntu the distro.
[17:36] <davmor2> ScottK: I don't but I only had time to rewrite the ubuntu desktop/installer/server testing docs so none really exist for kubuntu etc yet :(
[17:36] <on3_g> fagan: but all the info is related to ubuntu the distro
[17:37] <fagan> on3_g: well im sure I saw on qa.ubuntu.com kubuntu isos to be tested
[17:38] <davmor2> on3_g: see above
[17:38] <on3_g> fagan: that's rigth but, is not just about iso testing
[17:39] <marjo> on3_g: the charter for the QA team is:
[17:39] <marjo> The Ubuntu QA team is focused on developing tools, policies, and practices for ensuring Ubuntu's quality as a distribution as well as providing general advice, oversight, and leadership of QA activities within the Ubuntu project.
[17:40] <fagan> I thought kde upstream has a very extensive qa process
[17:41]  * fagan has got to go for dinner but will pick up the logs from the rest of the meeting
[17:41] <fader_> Maybe improving some of these test cases would be a good starting point for people looking to help but who don't know where to start.
[17:42] <davmor2> 1 query I have about upgrades dapper is pretty much coming to end of support isn't it should we be looking at doing upgrade from dapper-server to hardy-server aswell as hardy->lucid?
[17:43] <on3_g> marjo: ok
[17:43] <sbeattie> davmor2: yes, that's part of the LTS upgrade testing plan
[17:44] <marjo> fader_ agree
[17:44] <sbeattie> davmor2: at least, walking through dapper -> hardy -> lucid, and finding issues anywhere along the path.
[17:44] <bdmurray> and we can start dapper to hardy testing now! ;-)
[17:45] <sbeattie> indeed! That's another excellent place for people to start.
[17:46] <davmor2> sbeattie: I just meant ensuring that dapper would upgrade to hardy still and separate hardy->lucid tests.  Being as if a user is still on dapper it's for a reason so they'll probably only want to upgrade to hardy rather than lucid
[17:47] <marjo> davmor2: you're probably right, so we should take that into account
[17:47] <marjo> for the upgrades test matrix
[17:49] <marjo> i think we have to be smart about upgrades testing because of the potentially humongous problem space
[17:49] <marjo> yet, aim for largest possible test coverage
[17:50] <davmor2> sbeattie: maybe me and you can get together tomorrow afternoon (for me) morning (for you) and trash out a plan?
[17:50] <ScottK> One problem we had Dapper -> Hardy was that most of the testing was done on Main upgrades, but Universe packages failing can affect the overall upgrade success.
[17:51] <marjo> ScottK: yes, that's part of the being smart concept
[17:51] <ScottK> Right, just mentioning it since a lot of the people here weren't around then.
[17:51] <on3_g> davmor2: for begginers something like http://live.gnome.org/GnomeLove wil be great
[17:51] <marjo> the challenge is to plan ahead of time which paths to take
[17:51] <sbeattie> davmor2: I unfortunately have conflicts tomorrow, but perhaps we can take it to email? I do want to explore this.
[17:51] <davmor2> sbeattie: no worries dude
[17:52] <marjo> ok, folks, we're down to 8 minutes
[17:52] <marjo> we should continue this sort of discussion as we solidify test plans for lucid
[17:53] <marjo> folks: anything else for today?
[17:54] <marjo> if not, i propose we adjourn the meeting
[17:54] <fader_> Just a reminder that A1 is next week... get ready for testing!
[17:54] <davmor2> not here
[17:54] <davmor2> working iso's would be good for that :)
[17:55] <fader_> davmor2: agreed :)
[17:55] <marjo> going once
[17:55] <marjo> twice
[17:55] <marjo> meeting adjourned
[17:56] <marjo> thx everyone for your participation!
[17:56] <cr3> cheerio folks!
[17:56] <ara> thanks!
[17:56] <marjo> see you next week
[17:56] <fader_> Thanks all!
[17:56] <sbeattie> thanks, everyone!
[17:56] <marjo> #endmeeting
[17:56] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 11:56.
[17:56] <davmor2> thanks all

QATeam/Meetings/20091202 (last edited 2012-12-21 09:45:47 by javier-lopez)