- Previous Actions
ACTION: patrickmw to publish a list of launchpad projects that conform our automated testing in jenkins (gema, 17:04:05)
- Blueprints Update Precise
LINK: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Precise%20Daily%20ISOs/ (gema, 17:07:53)
#subtopic https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-p-qa-boot-speed-testing (gema, 17:12:40)
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-p-qa-kernel-sru (gema, 17:13:47)
LINK: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/TestCase (gema, 17:18:29)
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-p-qa-backlog (gema, 17:19:06)
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-p-qa-metrics (gema, 17:34:53)
Community Tasks - https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/TasksPrecise (gema, 17:35:24)
- Update Xubuntu
- Update Lubuntu
- Update Ubuntu
- Other Topics
LINK: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Precise/job/precise-problems-check/ (patrickmw)
Meeting ended at 17:44:00 UTC.
- patrickmw to publish a list of launchpad projects that conform our automated testing in jenkins
Action items, by person
- * patrickmw to publish a list of launchpad projects that conform our automated testing in jenkins
People present (lines said)
- gema (134)
- alourie (33)
- patrickmw (14)
- charlie-tca (12)
- kalosaurusrex (8)
- sconklin (8)
- brendand (7)
- nuclearbob (5)
- meetingology (4)
- txomon (2)
- kamusin (2)
- roadmr (1)
17:00:45 <gema> #startmeeting QA Meeting
17:00:45 <meetingology> Available commands: #accept #accepted #action #agree #agreed #chair #commands #endmeeting #endvote #halp #help #idea #info #link #lurk #meetingname #meetingtopic #nick #progress #rejected #replay #restrictlogs #save #startmeeting #subtopic #topic #unchair #undo #unlurk #vote #voters #votesrequired
17:00:50 * kamusin
17:01:01 <gema> hello everyone, who's present for the QA meeting?
17:01:07 <brendand> hi
17:01:11 <charlie-tca> o/
17:01:13 <roadmr> hello! 17:01:16 * kamusin o/
17:01:55 <gema> let's summon some others hggdh jibel_ nuclearbob patrickmw , are you guys there?
17:02:02 <nuclearbob> yep
17:02:06 <patrickmw> sure am
17:02:19 <gema> ok, let's get started
17:02:31 <gema> #topic Previous Actions 17:02:39 * gema gema to add lubuntu and Xubuntu testing updates to the agenda (gema, 17:08:59)
17:03:01 <gema> I did that , we are discussing those , you can check the agenda in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/Meetings
17:03:12 <gema> we can move them around if that's preferred 17:03:24 * gema patrickmw to publish a list of launchpad projects that conform our automated testing in jenkins (gema, 17:16:20)
17:03:37 <patrickmw> in progress
17:03:48 <gema> ok, so we'll keep it there for next week
17:04:05 <gema> #action patrickmw to publish a list of launchpad projects that conform our automated testing in jenkins 17:04:05 * meetingology patrickmw to publish a list of launchpad projects that conform our automated testing in jenkins
17:04:18 <gema> #topic Blueprints Update Precise
17:04:30 <gema> #subtopic https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-p-builds-smoke-testing
17:04:45 <gema> ok, any updates on this, anyone?
17:05:11 <kalosaurusrex> hello Aaron here
17:05:20 <gema> hi kalosaurusrex , go ahead
17:06:49 <gema> kalosaurusrex: do you want to give us an update?
17:07:03 <kalosaurusrex> I don't have an update exactly. but is there someone who checks the builds daily anyway? I was thinking about setting up a script that would pull down the daily and I could do a quick check as we add to the smoke test etc
17:07:37 <gema> kalosaurusrex: we are doing that in jenkins, let me paste a link to it
17:07:53 <gema> https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Precise%20Daily%20ISOs/
17:08:07 <gema> you can see there whether our basic install and little more testing passed or not
17:08:41 <kalosaurusrex> awesome thanks!
17:08:53 <gema> patrick will be publishing the list of launchpad projects that have the code we are running
17:09:17 <charlie-tca> o/
17:09:21 <gema> I don't think there's any update from us either, except that patrick and myself are trying to get jenkins to show the results in a nicer fashion
17:09:27 <gema> charlie-tca: go ahead
17:09:54 <charlie-tca> I am not sure, but it looks to me like a run on jenkins 9 hours ago was yesterday's images, or am reading times wrong? 17:10:07 * alourie just barely made it
17:10:27 <gema> charlie-tca: if I count well, 9 hours ago are 8am london time
17:10:43 <charlie-tca> So it is me?
17:10:52 <gema> charlie-tca: that is the usual time by when the new images are ready and jenkins starts automagically
17:11:07 <charlie-tca> Okay. Then I got confused again on times
17:11:35 <gema> charlie-tca: no probs
17:11:43 <gema> alourie: welcome
17:12:08 <gema> ok, other thing we are doing is trying to put together a bug report that shows which defects we've found on these executions
17:12:16 <gema> nuclearbob and I are working on that one too
17:12:23 <gema> we'll let you know when it is ready
17:12:30 <gema> moving on to the next topic then
17:12:40 <gema> #subtopic #subtopic https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-p-qa-boot-speed-testing
17:12:43 <gema> patrickmw ?
17:12:48 <patrickmw> * New info available on reports: http://reports.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/boot-speed/dell-vostro-3400/index.html
17:12:48 <patrickmw> * Still need to add Lucid benchmark to all systems
17:12:48 <patrickmw> * Adding more systems over the next few months
17:12:55 <patrickmw> ..
17:13:13 <gema> good, thanks
17:13:33 <gema> if anyone has questions please interrupt me, I won't be asking explicitely
17:13:47 <gema> #subtopic https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-p-qa-kernel-sru
17:13:51 <gema> sconklin ?
17:14:20 <sconklin> I've been doing two main tasks.
17:15:00 <sconklin> The first is an initial look at some performance tests that may be useful for measuring kernels for uses like Ubuntu Studio and other critical audio and video apps
17:15:10 <sconklin> Nothing conclusive has come out of that yet
17:15:41 <sconklin> The second is take perform a comprehensive look at LTP (Linus Test Project)
17:15:58 <sconklin> and determine what we should be running out of that test suite that we are not already running
17:16:22 <sconklin> as well as getting a better handle on our management of that test suite as part of our automated testing
17:16:31 <sconklin> That's about it.
17:16:33 <sconklin> ..
17:16:41 <gema> cool, thanks a lot
17:16:52 <gema> #subtopic https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-p-qa-standard-sru-testing
17:16:55 <gema> jibel_: ?
17:17:11 <gema> I don't think he is around, so let's move on
17:17:20 <gema> #subtopic https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-p-qa-test-case-management-tool
17:17:33 <gema> I had a conversation with the mozilla guys and they seem to be moving away from litmus and are developing a new tool, called CaseConductor that seems to be improving litmus
17:17:45 <gema> we are considering to go for that one, especially because they are finishing development now and are willing to accommodate our requirements. I am in the process of gathering those to be able to talk to them
17:18:03 <gema> So we may have to do some beta testing of their tool in exchange, whenever they are at that stage, in January
17:18:20 <gema> for the time being, it would be good if we used for our work of improving existing test cases, just spreadsheets, find a template at the bottom of the test case page
17:18:29 <gema> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/TestCase
17:18:42 <gema> ..
17:19:06 <gema> #subtopic https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-p-qa-backlog
17:19:24 <gema> does anyone have an update on backlog tasks?
17:19:31 <gema> or wiki improvements or similar?
17:19:37 <alourie> o/
17:19:41 <gema> alourie: go ahead
17:19:44 <alourie> alright
17:19:57 <alourie> so, we've started working on 7 items list
17:20:22 <gema> yep, brendand named it Wiki x)
17:20:34 <gema> (he didn't like my numbers, they are impersonal)
17:20:48 <alourie> personally, I'm not sure that wiki itself should update much
17:20:54 <alourie> but qa.ubuntu.com may
17:20:56 <brendand> gema - you're welcome
17:21:13 <alourie> brendand: you should send the list with names
17:21:40 <gema> ok, alourie , this is the wiki we are talking about right: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam
17:21:49 <alourie> yes
17:22:02 <alourie> it's quite up to date, maybe couple of things should be updated
17:22:11 <gema> I think it doesnt' really reflect what we are doing, does it?
17:22:13 <alourie> but the qa.u.c site seems to be abandoned
17:22:16 <alourie> well
17:22:36 <alourie> gema, why not?
17:23:20 <gema> alourie: because it seems to talk about bugsquad tasks which we are not necessarily focussing on
17:23:31 <gema> and it doesn't touch on the changes we are working on
17:23:41 <gema> what we are trying to achieve
17:23:50 <gema> I don't think we are doing good PR with that page
17:23:53 <gema> if you know what I mean
17:24:01 <gema> we are not inviting many people to help
17:24:01 <alourie> gema: oh, so you want to split it, so QATeam would specifically be concentrated on testing?
17:24:18 <gema> yep, that's what we've done already with the meeting and stuff
17:24:26 <gema> it is good to have a link to the bugsquad page
17:24:35 <gema> but we need to be clear on what our objectives are
17:24:38 <gema> which we are not
17:24:45 <alourie> ah, ok, got you
17:24:47 <alourie> agreed
17:25:12 <gema> so, I haven't had time to think about this
17:25:17 <gema> nor our tasks page is linked
17:25:25 <gema> or the active members are mentioned
17:25:28 <charlie-tca> Wouldn't it be better to rename the teams, QA testing and QA bugsquad?
17:25:31 <gema> but this needs some thinking
17:25:43 <alourie> charles: that would be a bit misleading I think
17:25:50 <gema> the bugsquad is already the bugsquad, they have a name
17:25:55 <brendand> BugSquad should be just that
17:26:00 <alourie> brendand: +1
17:26:01 <gema> the problem is that we seem to imply we are doing the same thins
17:26:02 <gema> things
17:26:05 <charlie-tca> but both teams are what QA is
17:26:14 <gema> no, bug triaging is one thing
17:26:17 <gema> QA is another thing
17:26:24 <gema> both important
17:26:26 <gema> but different 17:26:26 * brendand agrees
17:26:26 <alourie> gema: wait a sec 17:26:37 * kalosaurusrex agrees
17:26:42 <alourie> you mean that QA and BugSquad would split totally?
17:26:55 <gema> alourie: I think we have split totally
17:26:56 <charlie-tca> So, QA is only TESTING, it has no other functions?
17:27:01 <alourie> ahh
17:27:08 <gema> we have bdmurray helping us with our bug classification problems
17:27:08 <alourie> I haven't thought about it like that
17:27:09 <gema> etc
17:27:12 <gema> so we collaborate 17:27:23 * alourie agrees
17:27:27 <gema> charlie-tca: QA is about ensuring the quality of the OS
17:27:28 <alourie> now I get it
17:27:31 <gema> not just testing
17:27:40 <gema> there is more to it than just testing
17:27:48 <alourie> gema: well, ensuring by means of testing...
17:27:50 <gema> we may care about counting how many bugs we find, for instance
17:27:59 <alourie> ok, I get it now.
17:27:59 <gema> but not about triaging them as such
17:28:07 <brendand> what kind of bugs we are missing, etc
17:28:15 <gema> brendand: +1
17:28:19 <alourie> +1
17:28:44 <gema> cool, alourie , can you give it a thought on this light
17:28:49 <gema> and see what you come up with?
17:29:02 <gema> re qa.u.c, I agree, we should be posting more often
17:29:02 <alourie> sure. I think that we need a our "mission statement" to be refreshed
17:29:09 <gema> alourie: agreed
17:29:15 <alourie> ok, then I'll do that.
17:29:23 <gema> charlie-tca: are you happy with this?
17:29:47 <txomon> So, is that split documented with all that involves somewhere, or are we deciding it no?
17:29:50 <charlie-tca> I am confused than anything else. I will just have to see how it all ends up.
17:30:01 <gema> charlie-tca: ok
17:30:06 <txomon> s/no/now
17:30:11 <gema> txomon: we are trying to document it
17:30:16 <brendand> o/
17:30:18 <alourie> sorry guys, baby needs to go to sleep, I must leave now. I will read logs later.
17:30:24 <gema> txomon: and we will need collaboration with the bugsquad for that
17:30:32 <gema> ok alourie
17:30:34 <gema> brendand: ?
17:31:11 <alourie> gema: great then
17:31:14 <brendand> just to say that bug triaging can be considered a bridge between QA and the 'debugging' aspect of development
17:31:47 <gema> brendand: noted, we may continue this discussion on the list, we need to keep going
17:32:00 <gema> #subtopic https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-p-qa-qa-regression-testing
17:32:05 <gema> nuclearbob: ?
17:32:20 <nuclearbob> I've got an auotest package now
17:32:38 <nuclearbob> I'm getting it into better shape so it'll do al the necessary configuration and support upgrading and removal correctly
17:32:57 <nuclearbob> when we get the new hardware in the lab, we can install it and setup some test nodes to run the qrt scripts through autotest
17:33:18 <nuclearbob> ..
17:33:26 <gema> thanks!
17:33:33 <gema> #subtopic https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-p-qa-automated-test-submissions
17:33:37 <gema> patrickmw: ?
17:34:08 <patrickmw> This is the next priority item for me. I've started on it since boot speed is coming together
17:34:29 <patrickmw> Nothing major to report
17:34:45 <gema> cool, thanks
17:34:53 <gema> #subtopic https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-p-qa-metrics
17:35:13 <gema> nothing to report on this apart from the bug report nuclearbob and I are working on
17:35:24 <gema> #subtopic Community Tasks - https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/TasksPrecise
17:35:38 <gema> anything on the tasks that needs discussing and we haven't touched base on yet?
17:35:55 <kalosaurusrex> o/
17:36:01 <gema> kalosaurusrex: go ahead
17:36:39 <kalosaurusrex> so I have created a list of applications and verified against the manifest. All good there. My question is there set of criteria that we want to start with for applications to test during the smoke test?
17:37:02 <gema> kalosaurusrex: what I said in the email is what we have
17:37:10 <gema> developers needs need to be covered
17:37:15 <gema> and testers needs too
17:37:29 <gema> so any app that a dev or a tester would need to do their job needs to be smoke tested
17:37:52 <gema> so that we find the problems as early as they are introduced
17:38:11 <gema> does that make sense?
17:38:36 <kalosaurusrex> Okay makes sense. I was defiantly going to have a separate test for each. I guess I was wondering if anyone had anything specific or I can start building a list and email it out for suggestions.
17:38:39 <gema> making sure unity is up and running, for instance, with a ps or a top command
17:38:43 <gema> all simple things
17:38:52 <kalosaurusrex> Okay gotcha
17:39:27 <gema> ok, thanks for the work you are doing
17:39:32 <gema> moving on then
17:39:39 <gema> #topic Update Xubuntu
17:39:46 <gema> charlie-tca: ?
17:40:06 <charlie-tca> tested images this week. Today, all Xubuntu 64bit images fail to install
17:40:31 <charlie-tca> This appears to be a transmission uninstallable bug
17:40:34 <charlie-tca> ..
17:40:50 <gema> charlie-tca: thanks
17:40:58 <gema> #topic Update Lubuntu
17:41:12 <gema> anyone from Lubuntu with an update for us?
17:41:27 <gema> ok, next week then
17:41:35 <gema> #topic Update Ubuntu
17:41:42 <gema> hggdh, jibel_ ?
17:42:10 <gema> ok, resting after A1, I guess
17:42:20 <gema> #topic Other Topics
17:42:28 <gema> anything else anyone?
17:42:29 <patrickmw> o/
17:42:35 <gema> go for it patrickmw
17:42:40 <patrickmw> Thanks to jibel for sharing http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/testing/precise_probs.html
17:42:45 <patrickmw> This page gets updated with known Precise stability issues
17:42:51 <patrickmw> I created this job: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Precise/job/precise-problems-check/
17:42:56 <patrickmw> The job runs every hour and checks for issues. If issues are found, the job will fail and send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org
17:42:57 <patrickmw> ..
17:43:25 <gema> patrickmw: excellent, thanks a lot to you and jibel
17:43:42 <gema> anything else?
17:43:54 <gema> ok, we are done then
17:44:00 <gema> #endmeeting