[Test-Announce] 2015-10-26 @ 1600 ** Fedora 23 Blocker Review
# F23 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2015-10-26 # Time: 1600 UTC # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net It looks like we get to have at least one more F23 blocker review meeting before release (isn't that exciting!?). We have 2 newly proposed blockers to look at, and several accepted blockers to keep tabs on before the next Go/No-Go on Thursday. If you have time this weekend, to take a look at the proposed or accepted blockers before the meeting - the full list can be found here: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/ We'll be evaluating these bugs to see if they violate any of the Release Criteria and warrant the blocking of a release if they're not fixed. Information on the release criteria for F23 can be found on the wiki [0]. For more information about the Blocker and Freeze exception process, check out these links: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process And for those of you who are curious how a Blocker Review Meeting works - or how it's supposed to go and you want to run one - check out the SOP on the wiki: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting Have a good weekend and see you Monday! [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria -- // Mike -- Fedora QA freenode: roshi http://roshi.fedorapeople.org ___ test-announce mailing list test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test-announce -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Fedora Rawhide 20151023 compose check report
On Fri, 2015-10-23 at 14:36 -0400, Fedora compose checker wrote: > > Failed openQA tests: 22 of 49 So I took a quick look at this. There are a few 'real' fails but there's also a lot that basically look like timeouts. I suspect what's happening is that Rawhide debug kernels are making the tests run sufficiently slowly that they hit the timeouts, particularly the 1800 second (30 minute) timeout on the install process. We could bump that timeout a bit, perhaps only for Rawhide installs, or we could just wait till we get openQA migrated to more powerful hardware and hope that copes with it... -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: rawhide report: 20151023 changes
On Fri, 2015-10-23 at 10:52 +, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote: > [libreoffice] > 1:libreoffice-calc-5.0.3.1-1.fc24.i686 requires liborcus- > parser-0.8.so.0 > 1:libreoffice-calc-5.0.3.1-1.fc24.i This breaks Workstation live image compose, so a swift fix would be appreciated. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Fedora Rawhide 20151023 compose check report
Missing expected images: Workstation live i386 Workstation live x86_64 No images in this compose but not Rawhide 20151022 Images in Rawhide 20151022 but not this: Design_suite live x86_64 Workstation live x86_64 Workstation live i386 Cinnamon live i386 Mate live i386 Workstation disk raw armhfp Mate disk raw armhfp Cinnamon live x86_64 Design_suite live i386 Mate live x86_64 Failed openQA tests: 22 of 49 ID: 7138Test: i386 universal upgrade_desktop_32bit ID: 7135Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_desktop_64bit ID: 7134Test: x86_64 universal server_kickstart_hdd ID: 7132Test: x86_64 kde_live default_install ID: 7131Test: i386 kde_live default_install ID: 7130Test: i386 generic_boot default_install ID: 7126Test: i386 universal server_lvmthin ID: 7123Test: i386 universal server_software_raid ID: 7121Test: i386 universal server_repository_http_graphical ID: 7120Test: i386 universal server_scsi_updates_img ID: 7119Test: i386 universal package_set_minimal ID: 7116Test: x86_64 universal server_ext3@uefi ID: 7112Test: x86_64 universal server_simple_free_space@uefi ID: 7110Test: x86_64 universal server_delete_partial@uefi ID: 7107Test: x86_64 universal european_language_install ID: 7105Test: x86_64 universal server_shrink_ext4 ID: 7104Test: x86_64 universal server_updates_img_local ID: 7093Test: x86_64 universal server_simple_encrypted ID: 7092Test: x86_64 universal server_delete_partial ID: 7089Test: x86_64 universal server_mirrorlist_graphical ID: 7088Test: x86_64 universal server_delete_pata ID: 7086Test: x86_64 universal server_scsi_updates_img Passed openQA tests: 27 of 49 -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/fedora-qa.git/tree/check-compose -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [F24 Criteria Change] Cockpit Release Criteria
On Fri, 2015-10-23 at 07:41 -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > On Thursday, October 22, 2015 02:35:11 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > Recently, we discovered a bug in gnutls that caused Cockpit to be > > unreachable by recent versions of Google Chrome. It was ambiguous > > what > > the release criteria actually means, since it didn't specify which > > browser applications were blocking. I'd like to propose the > > following > > additional wording for Cockpit criteria: > > > > * All Cockpit functional criteria must be satisfied when the user > > is > > running any of the following blocking browsers: > > - Mozilla Firefox as shipped in the same Fedora release > > - Mozilla Firefox of the latest available version on Windows at > > compose time. > > - Mozilla Firefox of the latest available version on OSX at > > compose > > time. > > - Google Chrome of the latest available version on Fedora at > > compose > > time. > > - Google Chrome of the latest available version on Windows at > > compose > > time. > > - Google Chrome of the latest available version on OSX at compose > > time. > > > > > > Alternately, we could decide that it's only *blocking* if the above > > browsers work with Cockpit when the browser is running on Fedora, > > but > > that is somewhat at odds with our reasoning for having a management > > console as a web UI in the first place: that it is accessible > > regardless of the client system. > > I think that it is fine. But you need to make sure you have resources > available to test on Windows and OS X. Not necessarily. we don't have an exact 1:1 mapping of testing to criteria. We test some stuff beyond the criteria, and we don't test some stuff that *is* in the criteria; things like the 'data corruption' criterion aren't realistically testable, exactly. There's a precedent that it's OK to have criteria which basically work this way: if someone reports a violation and it gets nominated, it will be approved. > I wonder what can be done to do > automated testing on the platforms to ensure things work. There are various 'see how your site looks in X' services, I don't know much about any of them though. > I would like to have > us try and automate most if not all of the validation, at least in a > basic > level. This is exactly what we've been doing with openQA for the last twelve months. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [F24 Criteria Change] Cockpit Release Criteria
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 02:35:11PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Recently, we discovered a bug in gnutls that caused Cockpit to be > unreachable by recent versions of Google Chrome. It was ambiguous what > the release criteria actually means, since it didn't specify which > browser applications were blocking. I'd like to propose the following > additional wording for Cockpit criteria: > > * All Cockpit functional criteria must be satisfied when the user is > running any of the following blocking browsers: > - Mozilla Firefox as shipped in the same Fedora release > - Mozilla Firefox of the latest available version on Windows at >compose time. > - Mozilla Firefox of the latest available version on OSX at compose >time. > - Google Chrome of the latest available version on Fedora at compose >time. > - Google Chrome of the latest available version on Windows at compose >time. > - Google Chrome of the latest available version on OSX at compose time. > > > Alternately, we could decide that it's only *blocking* if the above > browsers work with Cockpit when the browser is running on Fedora, but > that is somewhat at odds with our reasoning for having a management > console as a web UI in the first place: that it is accessible > regardless of the client system. > > Comments welcome, but please keep replies on the > test@lists.fedoraproject.org list, as that's where criteria decisions > are made. > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v2 > > iEYEARECAAYFAlYpLFwACgkQeiVVYja6o6NF/wCgg6iot1JKOfmAbTZMboBcPvs5 > ZIIAnA+YxRAjPMt69lqv2nOR7qXnCYnV > =PIuy > -END PGP SIGNATURE- I'm +1 in general to these criteria. As Dennis said, we just need to make sure we have access to Windows/OSX in order to actually do the testing. -- // Mike -- Fedora QA freenode: roshi http://roshi.fedorapeople.org -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [F24 Criteria Change] Cockpit Release Criteria
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 07:41:56AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > On Thursday, October 22, 2015 02:35:11 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > Recently, we discovered a bug in gnutls that caused Cockpit to be > > unreachable by recent versions of Google Chrome. It was ambiguous what > > the release criteria actually means, since it didn't specify which > > browser applications were blocking. I'd like to propose the following > > additional wording for Cockpit criteria: > > > > * All Cockpit functional criteria must be satisfied when the user is > > running any of the following blocking browsers: > > - Mozilla Firefox as shipped in the same Fedora release > > - Mozilla Firefox of the latest available version on Windows at > >compose time. > > - Mozilla Firefox of the latest available version on OSX at compose > >time. > > - Google Chrome of the latest available version on Fedora at compose > >time. > > - Google Chrome of the latest available version on Windows at compose > >time. > > - Google Chrome of the latest available version on OSX at compose time. > > > > > > Alternately, we could decide that it's only *blocking* if the above > > browsers work with Cockpit when the browser is running on Fedora, but > > that is somewhat at odds with our reasoning for having a management > > console as a web UI in the first place: that it is accessible > > regardless of the client system. > > I think that it is fine. But you need to make sure you have resources > available to test on Windows and OS X. I wonder what can be done to do > automated testing on the platforms to ensure things work. I would like to > have > us try and automate most if not all of the validation, at least in a basic > level. > > Dennis FWIW, I'm willing to help write some selenium [0] tests for validating cockpit. Depending on if we can get licenses for the different OSs we want to validate against, we could also set up a grid [1] for that. It's been a while since I've worked with selenium, but I don't think it'd take me long to get back up to speed. [0] http://www.seleniumhq.org/ [1] https://github.com/SeleniumHQ/selenium/wiki/Grid2 -- // Mike -- Fedora QA freenode: roshi http://roshi.fedorapeople.org -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Fedora 21 updates-testing report
Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 10/19/2015 12:20 AM, upda...@fedoraproject.org wrote: >> The following Fedora 21 Security updates need testing: > > Could we remove these notices? It's been obvious for years that no one > cares about them. I would disagree that the fix for perceived "no one cares" is to stop trying. -- Rex -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [F24 Criteria Change] Cockpit Release Criteria
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/23/2015 08:41 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > On Thursday, October 22, 2015 02:35:11 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote: >> Recently, we discovered a bug in gnutls that caused Cockpit to >> be unreachable by recent versions of Google Chrome. It was >> ambiguous what the release criteria actually means, since it >> didn't specify which browser applications were blocking. I'd like >> to propose the following additional wording for Cockpit >> criteria: >> >> * All Cockpit functional criteria must be satisfied when the user >> is running any of the following blocking browsers: - Mozilla >> Firefox as shipped in the same Fedora release - Mozilla Firefox >> of the latest available version on Windows at compose time. - >> Mozilla Firefox of the latest available version on OSX at >> compose time. - Google Chrome of the latest available version on >> Fedora at compose time. - Google Chrome of the latest available >> version on Windows at compose time. - Google Chrome of the latest >> available version on OSX at compose time. >> >> >> Alternately, we could decide that it's only *blocking* if the >> above browsers work with Cockpit when the browser is running on >> Fedora, but that is somewhat at odds with our reasoning for >> having a management console as a web UI in the first place: that >> it is accessible regardless of the client system. > > I think that it is fine. But you need to make sure you have > resources available to test on Windows and OS X. I wonder what can > be done to do automated testing on the platforms to ensure things > work. I would like to have us try and automate most if not all of > the validation, at least in a basic level. > Stef Walter (Cockpit lead) proposed the same statement in another reply (which I suspect is sitting in moderation). So yes, the plan is to have that handled at the very least in the upstream automated testing, which should presumably be reusable by Fedora QA. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlYqLgoACgkQeiVVYja6o6M2zQCcCYA4LR+xtmvw8uti5VeORgSR kEsAnRPh1OzbM5Z5rWNI2XLkHT8oCPF1 =Lucl -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [F24 Criteria Change] Cockpit Release Criteria
On Thursday, October 22, 2015 02:35:11 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote: > Recently, we discovered a bug in gnutls that caused Cockpit to be > unreachable by recent versions of Google Chrome. It was ambiguous what > the release criteria actually means, since it didn't specify which > browser applications were blocking. I'd like to propose the following > additional wording for Cockpit criteria: > > * All Cockpit functional criteria must be satisfied when the user is > running any of the following blocking browsers: > - Mozilla Firefox as shipped in the same Fedora release > - Mozilla Firefox of the latest available version on Windows at >compose time. > - Mozilla Firefox of the latest available version on OSX at compose >time. > - Google Chrome of the latest available version on Fedora at compose >time. > - Google Chrome of the latest available version on Windows at compose >time. > - Google Chrome of the latest available version on OSX at compose time. > > > Alternately, we could decide that it's only *blocking* if the above > browsers work with Cockpit when the browser is running on Fedora, but > that is somewhat at odds with our reasoning for having a management > console as a web UI in the first place: that it is accessible > regardless of the client system. I think that it is fine. But you need to make sure you have resources available to test on Windows and OS X. I wonder what can be done to do automated testing on the platforms to ensure things work. I would like to have us try and automate most if not all of the validation, at least in a basic level. Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: F23 Final Workstation x86_64 RC3, Root PW not accepted - my fault?
Hi, after reinstall root pw is accepted, sorry for the misinfo. Kind regards -Ursprüngliche Mitteilung- Von: Joerg Lechner An: test Verschickt: Fr, 23 Okt 2015 1:42 pm Betreff: F23 Final Workstation x86_64 RC3, Root PW not accepted - my fault? Hi, after installation of RC3 is my usual root password not accepted, i.e. xterm su, or Gnome SW install of Gparted. Could be a mistyping during F23 installation, will do a reinstall and have and eye on my pw typing then. Anyway it could be an system error. I don't know. Kind regards -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
F23 Final Workstation x86_64 RC3, Root PW not accepted - my fault?
Hi, after installation of RC3 is my usual root password not accepted, i.e. xterm su, or Gnome SW install of Gparted. Could be a mistyping during F23 installation, will do a reinstall and have and eye on my pw typing then. Anyway it could be an system error. I don't know. Kind regards -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
rawhide report: 20151023 changes
Compose started at Fri Oct 23 05:15:03 UTC 2015 Broken deps for i386 -- [IQmol] IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libboost_serialization.so.1.58.0 IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libboost_iostreams.so.1.58.0 IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libOpenMeshCore.so.3.2 [alliance] alliance-5.0-40.20090901snap.fc22.i686 requires libXm.so.2 [atomic-reactor] python-atomic-reactor-rebuilds-1.6.0-1.fc24.noarch requires osbs >= 0:0.15 python3-atomic-reactor-rebuilds-1.6.0-1.fc24.noarch requires osbs >= 0:0.15 [eclipse-jbosstools] eclipse-jbosstools-as-4.2.2-1.fc22.noarch requires osgi(org.eclipse.tm.terminal) [fawkes] fawkes-plugin-player-0.5.0-26.fc24.i686 requires libgeos-3.4.2.so [gnash] 1:gnash-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_thread.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_system.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_serialization.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_iostreams.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_date_time.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-cygnal-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_thread.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-cygnal-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_system.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-cygnal-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_serialization.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-cygnal-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-cygnal-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_iostreams.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-cygnal-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_date_time.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-extension-dejagnu-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_thread.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-extension-dejagnu-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_system.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-extension-dejagnu-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-extension-dejagnu-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_iostreams.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-extension-fileio-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_thread.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-extension-fileio-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_system.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-extension-fileio-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-extension-fileio-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_iostreams.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-extension-lirc-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_thread.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-extension-lirc-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_system.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-extension-lirc-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-extension-lirc-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_iostreams.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-extension-mysql-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_thread.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-extension-mysql-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_system.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-extension-mysql-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-extension-mysql-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_iostreams.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-klash-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_system.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-klash-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.1.58.0 1:gnash-plugin-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_iostreams.so.1.58.0 1:python-gnash-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_thread.so.1.58.0 1:python-gnash-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_system.so.1.58.0 1:python-gnash-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.1.58.0 1:python-gnash-0.8.10-19.fc24.i686 requires libboost_iostreams.so.1.58.0 [golang-github-kraman-libcontainer] golang-github-kraman-libcontainer-devel-0-0.4.gitd700e5b.fc24.noarch requires golang(github.com/docker/docker/pkg/netlink) [golang-github-kubernetes-heapster] golang-github-kubernetes-heapster-devel-0.16.1-1.fc24.noarch requires golang(github.com/google/cadvisor/info/v1) golang-github-kubernetes-heapster-devel-0.16.1-1.fc24.noarch requires golang(github.com/google/cadvisor/client) golang-github-kubernetes-heapster-devel-0.16.1-1.fc24.noarch requires golang(github.com/coreos/fleet/schema) golang-github-kubernetes-heapster-devel-0.16.1-1.fc24.noarch requires golang(github.com/coreos/fleet/registry) golang-github-kubernetes-heapster-devel-0.16.1-1.fc24.noarch requires golang(github.com/coreos/fleet/pkg) golang-github-kubernetes-heapster-devel-0.16.1-1.fc24.noarch requires golang(github.com/coreos/fleet/machine) golang-github-kubernetes-heapster-devel-0.16.1-1.fc24.noarch requires golang(github.com/coreos/fleet/etcd) golang-github-kubernetes-heapster-devel-0.16.1-1.fc24.noarch requires golang(github.com/coreos/fleet/client) [golang-github-prometheus-prometheus] golang-github-pr
[Test-Announce] Fedora 23 Go/No-Go Meeting - 2nd round, on Thursday, October 29th, 4PM (UTC)
Join us on irc.freenode.net in #fedora-meeting-2 for the second round of the Go/No-Go meeting, wherein we shall determine the readiness of the Fedora 23. The meeting is scheduled at 4PM (UTC). Please follow the [FedoCal] link to find the time of the meeting in your time-zone. [FedoCal] https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/meeting/3146/ "Before each public release Development, QA and Release Engineering meet to determine if the release criteria are met for a particular release. This meeting is called the Go/No-Go Meeting." "Verifying that the Release criteria are met is the responsibility of the QA Team." For more details about this meeting see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Go_No_Go_Meeting In the meantime, keep an eye on the Fedora 23 Final Blocker list: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/23/final/buglist Thanks for attending, Jan -- Jan Kuřík Platform & Fedora Program Manager Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic ___ test-announce mailing list test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test-announce-- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
[Test-Announce] Fedora 23 Final Release Compose 3 (RC3) Available Now!
A little late [1], Fedora 23 Final Release Compose 3 (RC3) is now available for testing. Please help us complete all the validation testing! RC3 contains fixes for all known blockers, plus some significant freeze exception issues; there are no outstanding proposed blockers, so we definitely want to get down to some serious testing on this compose. Content information, including changes, can be found at https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6266#comment:15 . Please see the following pages for download links and testing instructions. Normally dl.fedoraproject.org should provide the fastest download, but download- ib01.fedoraproject.org is available as a mirror (with an approximately 1 hour lag) in case of trouble. To use it, just replace "dl" with "download-ib01" in the download URL. Installation: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Installation_Test Base: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Base_Test Workstation and Desktop: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test Server: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Server_Test Cloud: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Cloud_Test Summary: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Summary All Alpha, Beta and Final priority test cases for each of these test pages [2] must pass in order to meet the Final Release Criteria [3]. Help is available on #fedora-qa on irc.freenode.net [4], or on the test list [5]. Create Fedora 23 Final test compose (TC) and release candidate (RC) https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6266 Current Blocker and Freeze Exception bugs: http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current [1] http://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-23/f-23-quality-tasks.html [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_23_Final_Release_Criteria [4] irc://irc.freenode.net/fedora-qa [5] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net ___ test-announce mailing list test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test-announce -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
