Fedora 27 updates-testing report

The following Fedora 27 Security updates need testing: Age URL 40 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-9fd430dba0 wireshark-2.4.2-1.fc27 7 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-7d25605e98 quagga-1.2.2-1.fc27 6

Fedora 25 updates-testing report

The following Fedora 25 Security updates need testing: Age URL 330 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-d79ba708cb exim-4.87.1-1.fc25 167 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-5d7498559f nodejs-brace-expansion-1.1.7-1.fc25 118

Fedora Modular bikeshed compose report: changes

___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Fedora-Modular 27-20171121.n.1 compose check report

Missing expected images: Docker_base docker x86_64 Server dvd arm Failed openQA tests: 26/94 (x86_64), 4/19 (i386) ID: 172775 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/172775 ID: 172776 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso support_server URL:

Fedora Modular 27 compose report: 20171121.n.1 changes

OLD: Fedora-Modular-27-20171121.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Modular-27-20171121.n.1 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 8 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0.00 B Size of dropped packages

Fedora Rawhide-20171121.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Server dvd i386 Workstation live i386 Server boot i386 Kde live i386 Failed openQA tests: 90/128 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm) New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20171120.n.0): ID: 172599 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi URL:

Re: Fedora 27 Modular Server release validation

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 4:04 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > Hi folks! > > So it's been an open question exactly how we would do release > validation for the Modular Server release. For Beta, we wound up trying > to co-ordinate it via mailing list and IRC; I thought doing

Mandatory Release notes for Changes

For a long time we have an issue with readiness of Release notes for a release. To solve this issue me and @bex met and we came up with a proposal for a Changes Policy [2] addendum. As I would like to have people from different teams (Devel, QA, Doc, Trans, ...) to review this proposal and I do