20111207

Meeting summary

  • Previous Actions

ACTION: patrickmw to publish a list of launchpad projects that conform our automated testing in jenkins (gema, 17:04:05)

LINK: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Precise%20Daily%20ISOs/ (gema, 17:07:53)

LINK: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/TestCase (gema, 17:18:29)

  • Update Xubuntu
  • Update Lubuntu
  • Update Ubuntu
  • Other Topics

LINK: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Precise/job/precise-problems-check/ (patrickmw)

LINK: http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/testing/precise_probs.html (jibel)

Meeting ended at 17:44:00 UTC.

Votes

Action items

  • patrickmw to publish a list of launchpad projects that conform our automated testing in jenkins

Action items, by person

  • patrickmw
  • * 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)

Full Log

  • 17:00:45 <gema> #startmeeting QA Meeting

    17:00:45 <meetingology> Meeting started Wed Dec 7 17:00:45 2011 UTC. The chair is gema. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/AlanBell/mootbot.

    17:00:45 <meetingology>

    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 Smile :)

    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)

    17:20:39 <alourie> Smile :-)

    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 Wink ;)

    17:21:13 <alourie> brendand: you should send the list with names Smile :-)

    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 Big Grin :)

    17:24:01 <alourie> gema: oh, so you want to split it, so QATeam would specifically be concentrated on testing?

    17:24:06 <alourie>

    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...

    17:27:49 <alourie> Smile :-)

    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 Smile :)

    17:39:27 <gema> ok, thanks for the work you are doing Smile :)

    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 ubuntu-testing-notifications@lists.ubuntu.com

    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

Generated by MeetBot 0.1.5 (http://wiki.ubuntu.com/AlanBell/mootbot)

QATeam/Meetings/QA/20111207 (last edited 2011-12-07 17:51:05 by gema)