== Summary == == Logs == {{{ [17:00] #startmeeting QA Team [17:00] Meeting started at 11:00. The chair is marjo. [17:00] Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE] [17:00] Agenda: [17:00] * SRU testing -- sbeattie (Steve Beattie) [17:00] * Bugday highlights -- pedro [17:00] * QA mailing list -- fader [17:00] Anybody want to add to the agenda? [17:01] [TOPIC] SRU testing -- sbeattie (Steve Beattie) [17:01] New Topic: SRU testing -- sbeattie (Steve Beattie) [17:02] SRU activity has slowed about, perhaps due to the US holiday last week. [17:02] SRU Activity report for the past week (since 2009-11-24): [17:02] * 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] * jaunty: 2 new packages in -proposed (conduit, openafs) and 1 pushed to -updates (tzdata) [17:02] * intrepid: 1 new package in -proposed (pidgin) and 1 pushed to -updates (tzdata) [17:02] * hardy: 2 packages pushed to -updates (sun-java6, tzdata) [17:02] * dapper: 1 package pushed to -updates (langpack-locales) [17:02] 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] That's all I have on the topic for this week. [17:04] sbeattie: thx [17:04] [TOPIC] Bugday highlights -- pedro [17:04] New Topic: Bugday highlights -- pedro [17:05] Tomorrow we're having our first Bug Day after coming back from UDS [17:05] the target will be Ubuntu Translations https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugDay/20091203 [17:05] Thanks a lot to Victor Vargas (aka Kamusin) who organized mostly all of it [17:05] Kamusin: thx! [17:06] Next Week we're having a Compiz bug day and we are looking for more hands to organize it [17:06] 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] 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] fagan, awesome! thanks [17:07] marjo, that's all from here [17:07] fagan: thx; glad to know you have the right priorities! [17:08] marjo: I thought the right priorities were QA > sleep > food > studying [17:08] :) [17:08] sleep? food? what for? [17:08] :-P [17:08] Hehe [17:08] fader_: we need to talk privately :) for me to give you some needed advice [17:08] for me is food>college assignments>classes>everything else :D [17:09] [TOPIC] QA mailing list -- fader [17:09] New Topic: QA mailing list -- fader [17:09] 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] There is a QA team mailing list on LP, but it seems to be older and has some entry requirements: [17:10] (And I lost the URL, hang on :) ) [17:10] https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-qa [17:10] fader_ : lack of sleep... [17:10] 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] 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] I was looking at this last week or so [17:11] ubuntu-qa@lists.ubuntu.com this one you mean [17:11] fader_, the team is moderated, but the list is open https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/Ubuntu-quality [17:11] ara: Ah, I interpreted the team being moderated to mean the list was as well, thanks [17:12] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-qa/2008-July/000166.html [17:12] fader_ : so no need for yet another mailing list, right? [17:12] 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] fader_: yes, please [17:12] marjo: no just utilise the one we already have :D [17:12] marjo: I'd say no, assuming everyone is happy using this existing list [17:12] isnt it because we own the sru tools [17:13] that should be part of our community outreach for testing [17:13] Excellent, I'll send people there whenever they look like they can be tricked into helping us test. :D [17:13] for the testing team we are going to have ubuntu-testing mailing list [17:14] ok, so from now on, we will use that list to get the word out to a broad audience [17:14] ara: What is the goal of that list? How is it going to be different from the QA team list? [17:14] ara: can't you also announce to the qa list we're talking about? more, the merrier, no? [17:14] Id like to have one main list rather than a QA list and a testing list [17:15] +1, unless ara has a legitimate reason to split the two [17:15] I wanted to have a sense of team, as the bugsquad. ubuntu-testing for team discussions [17:15] Fragmentation is bad when the teams are small [17:15] fagan: i'm thinking of the QA list as covering a broader audience, while the testing list is for testing only [17:16] fagan: but we want to expand the community from small to bigger [17:16] Is there anyone interested in the QA list that would not be interested in testing? [17:16] * fagan doesnt think so [17:16] i ASSume QA list > testing list, no? [17:16] I'd hate to have to join two lists and post/see the same information twice :) [17:16] fader_: oic [17:16] I think we should revisit it when the testing team gets bigger [17:17] Again, maybe I'm missing a use-case, but I agree with fagan on this one [17:17] fader_, but, again, we can keep ubuntu-testing as internal discussion of the team [17:17] Most of us are on IRC anyway [17:17] I see ara's point though [17:18] fader_, not for announcements, but for things like, who is going to update the wiki for blah, blah, blah [17:18] 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] fader_, the testing work yes [17:19] Sure then [17:19] 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] 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] therefore, use the QA list in addition to testing list [17:19] marjo: sure, that's a typical thing to announce. [17:20] +1 then too [17:20] marjo: My worry is that anyone who will do ISO testing needs to be on the testing list anyway, to coordinate [17:20] fader_ : yes, of course [17:20] personally, I'd like to see the QA team list get more discussion traffic as well. [17:20] so, your concern is the dup of info, right? [17:21] 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] I don't mind using ubuntu-qa list, I just prefer the -testing term :) [17:21] Heh so maybe a name change is in order :) [17:21] fader_, no, no worries [17:22] fader_, if it is going to be a testing discussion on it, ubuntu-qa seems good to me [17:22] ara: if that's the case, let's just use ubuntu-qa list [17:22] Very quickly I think the ubuntu-qa mailing list was one of laserjocks implementations to improve qa involvement [17:22] davmor2: well then we've just rediscovered the original intent which remains the same today! [17:22] brilliant! [17:22] davmor2, yes, but now it is just a list of mails from people asking for CDs :D [17:22] davmor2: the list predated the team, the team was the "improve involvement" bit. [17:23] 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] davmor2: no! [17:23] davmor2: Or use #ubuntu-quality more :) [17:23] davmor2: QA is the umbrella for testing [17:24] to me, QA includes bug management and testing [17:24] fagan: agree! [17:24] 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] fader_: +1 [17:25] * fader_ hustles off to sign up for the mailing list. [17:25] fader_: just to be sure, what "list we have now" are you proposing? [17:25] marjo: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality [17:25] ubuntu-qa marjo [17:26] ok, so the decision is: [17:26] Continue to use: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality for QA related announcements and discussions [17:26] everyone agree? [17:26] +1 [17:26] +1 [17:26] but we have to promote the list too [17:27] +1 [17:27] +1 [17:27] +1 [17:27] fagan: Definitely! :) [17:27] +1 [17:27] +1 [17:27] +1 [17:27] +1 [17:27] +1 [17:27] 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] anything else on this topic? [17:28] * fagan puts a planet post about the ubuntu-qa team on his todo list [17:28] marjo: Not from me; I'm happy. [17:28] fagan: Good idea; I'll blog about it as well. [17:28] fader_: thx for bringing it up and taking the lead [17:28] np [17:29] wow, such a lively discussion [17:29] i love it! [17:29] ok, any new topics for today? [17:29] 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] I think for the launchpad team we should keep it moderated and maybe make a new team for beginners [17:29] davmor2: There's not now AFAIK... [17:30] Like what the docs team did a while back [17:30] fagan: +1 [17:30] davmor2: ok [17:30] it'll help promote it with a minimum of work [17:31] 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] i think info for beginners is poor [17:31] fagan: can you please remind us of what the "docs team did"? [17:31] on3_g: +1 [17:31] folks: remember one of the outcomes at UDS was: [17:32] * kamusin on3_g +1 [17:32] make it simple for the community to get involved, step 1, 2, 3... [17:32] and info for another distro flavors like xubuntu and kubuntu (especially) too [17:32] 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] fagan: oic [17:33] marjo: +1 [17:33] and they find it to be effective? [17:33] Yep [17:34] Plus the moderated team can own SRU tools..etc [17:34] in any case, I would keep the testing team for people willing to test [17:34] ara: thats a given [17:34] ara: agree [17:34] 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] That would encompass the other flavors as well (even if they get less resources from Canonical) [17:35] ScottK: we do test kubuntu and xubuntu as well [17:35] fagan: I'm aware === TDKcross is now known as DKcross [17:36] It's just that when you say it's the Ubuntu QA team, think of Ubuntu the project, not Ubuntu the distro. [17:36] 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] fagan: but all the info is related to ubuntu the distro [17:37] on3_g: well im sure I saw on qa.ubuntu.com kubuntu isos to be tested [17:38] on3_g: see above [17:38] fagan: that's rigth but, is not just about iso testing [17:39] on3_g: the charter for the QA team is: [17:39] 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] 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] 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] 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] marjo: ok [17:43] davmor2: yes, that's part of the LTS upgrade testing plan [17:44] fader_ agree [17:44] davmor2: at least, walking through dapper -> hardy -> lucid, and finding issues anywhere along the path. [17:44] and we can start dapper to hardy testing now! ;-) [17:45] indeed! That's another excellent place for people to start. [17:46] 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] davmor2: you're probably right, so we should take that into account [17:47] for the upgrades test matrix [17:49] i think we have to be smart about upgrades testing because of the potentially humongous problem space [17:49] yet, aim for largest possible test coverage [17:50] sbeattie: maybe me and you can get together tomorrow afternoon (for me) morning (for you) and trash out a plan? [17:50] 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] ScottK: yes, that's part of the being smart concept [17:51] Right, just mentioning it since a lot of the people here weren't around then. [17:51] davmor2: for begginers something like http://live.gnome.org/GnomeLove wil be great [17:51] the challenge is to plan ahead of time which paths to take [17:51] davmor2: I unfortunately have conflicts tomorrow, but perhaps we can take it to email? I do want to explore this. [17:51] sbeattie: no worries dude [17:52] ok, folks, we're down to 8 minutes [17:52] we should continue this sort of discussion as we solidify test plans for lucid [17:53] folks: anything else for today? [17:54] if not, i propose we adjourn the meeting [17:54] Just a reminder that A1 is next week... get ready for testing! [17:54] not here [17:54] working iso's would be good for that :) [17:55] davmor2: agreed :) [17:55] going once [17:55] twice [17:55] meeting adjourned [17:56] thx everyone for your participation! [17:56] cheerio folks! [17:56] thanks! [17:56] see you next week [17:56] Thanks all! [17:56] thanks, everyone! [17:56] #endmeeting [17:56] Meeting finished at 11:56. [17:56] thanks all }}}