Re: criterion proposal: upgrading across 2 releases

[Chris Murphy]

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 8:38 AM, Kamil Paral  wrote:

> Yay for overloaded terms. What we can do is to use "current stable release", 
> "previous stable release" and "Branched release". Do you think that makes 
> sense or do you see a better way?

Tricky. For ~2 months each year there are three supported current
stable releases at the same time.

rawhide
next-release (or branched)
current-release
previous-release
expiring-release
expired

"Branched" is good because it ties the release to the branching
process, which is an existing familiar term. I don't like combining
"branched" with the word release though, because this isn't a release
yet. Whereas 'next-release' suggests it's not yet a release but will
be. Another plus for next-release is that before branch, it's also
rawhide, whereas branched(-release) doesn't exist until branch
happens.

previous and expiring could just be referred to as previous.

stable vs release
Does using both help? Or is this just wordy? I'm not thinking how the
combination helps. Is there an unstable release? Are there previous
unstable releases? Ostensibly Fedora releases stable software, so I
think stable release is redundant. I'd pick one: i.e. current-stable
or current-release.

This way it's possible refer to supported releases as just "release"
or as *-release rather than "one or more previous stable" or "current
or previous". Just call them Fedora *-release. It's less wordy.

Yeah there is a bit of secret decoder ring with this too, but off hand
I think it's easier to explain/document, remember, and write out than
long handing everything. In any case, the terms chosen should be
useful to those who use them the most.

-- 
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: criterion proposal: upgrading across 2 releases

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2016-02-08 at 10:38 -0500, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > > 
> > I think the only problem with that is that in the criteria pages I
> > tend
> > to use 'current release' to refer to the release under test. You
> > might
> > need to search through the criteria pages for other occurrences of
> > terms like "current" and "previous" and reconcile those, too -
> > basically come up with some consistent terms and make sure they're
> > all
> > used consistently throughout all three pages.
> 
> Yay for overloaded terms. What we can do is to use "current stable
> release", "previous stable release" and "Branched release". Do you
> think that makes sense or do you see a better way?

I might suggest "the release being tested" instead of "Branched
release", but of course it kinda depends on context.

> But I'm not fully convince we really need to be that strict about the
> choice of words here.
> 
> Apart from these, I don't see any further edits needed.

I'd say we should try to be consistent but not at the cost of making
the language sound incredibly awkward in context. I'd say go ahead and
do it as best you can, we can always tweak it later :) Thanks!
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: criterion proposal: upgrading across 2 releases

[Kamil Paral]

> > They use our updated terminology of "current" and "previous" Fedora
> > release. To keep things consistent, I propose to change the current
> > criterion [1]:
> > "For each one of the release-blocking package sets, it must be possible to
> > successfully complete an upgrade from a fully updated installation of the
> > previous stable Fedora release with that package set installed. "
> > into
> > "For each one of the release-blocking package sets, it must be possible to
> > successfully complete an upgrade from a fully updated installation of the
> > current and previous stable Fedora release with that package set
> > installed. "
> > 
> > References section would get updated with a link to this thread. The
> > criterion itself does not mention that by upgrade we mean a direct upgrade
> > (not one by one release). If you think it's not clear enough, I can add
> > some wording to the criterion (phrasing suggestions welcome) or add
> > another description section below it.
> > 
> > [1]
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_24_Beta_Release_Criteria#Upgrade_requirements
> 
> I think the only problem with that is that in the criteria pages I tend
> to use 'current release' to refer to the release under test. You might
> need to search through the criteria pages for other occurrences of
> terms like "current" and "previous" and reconcile those, too -
> basically come up with some consistent terms and make sure they're all
> used consistently throughout all three pages.

Yay for overloaded terms. What we can do is to use "current stable release", 
"previous stable release" and "Branched release". Do you think that makes sense 
or do you see a better way?

I went through the wiki pages and this would have to change:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_24_Alpha_Release_Criteria#Desktop_background
Change
"The default desktop background must be different from that of the two previous 
stable releases. "
to
"The default desktop background must be different from the current stable and 
previous stable release. "
(or maybe the original sentence is clear enough?)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_24_Beta_Release_Criteria#Guest_on_previous_release
Change
" Guest on previous release
The release must install and boot successfully as a virtual guest in a 
situation where the virtual host is running the previous stable Fedora release. 
"
to
" Guest on current stable release
The release must install and boot successfully as a virtual guest in a 
situation where the virtual host is running the current stable Fedora release. "

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process
This is tricky. We agreed on "AcceptedPreviousRelease" flag name. I wouldn't 
change that. There's also:
"AcceptedPreviousRelease is used for cases where the fix must appear as an 
update for one or more previous stable releases. "
which can be
"AcceptedPreviousRelease is used for cases where the fix must appear as an 
update for the current or previous stable release. "
And
"this will usually need to be fixed in the previous stable releases, not the 
new release"
which can be
"this will usually need to be fixed in the current or previous stable release, 
not the new release"
But I'm not fully convince we really need to be that strict about the choice of 
words here.

Apart from these, I don't see any further edits needed.
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Meetings today cancelled

[Adam Williamson]

Hi folks! Very sorry I forgot to send out meeting announcements - I
totally forgot about the meetings, then Kamil reminded me and I was
going to send them, then I got distracted into Test Day trac tickets
somehow and completely forgot. I think we all know I'm an idiot. =) We
have only one blocker bug to review at present, but there's probably
some business to go over at a QA meeting, so expect one next week!
Thanks a lot everyone.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [Fedora QA] #477: Proposed Test Day - NetworkManager (2015-08-20)

[Fedora QA]

#477: Proposed Test Day - NetworkManager (2015-08-20)
---+---
  Reporter:  lkundrak  |  Owner:
  Type:  task  | Status:  closed
  Priority:  major |  Milestone:  Fedora 23
 Component:  Test Day  |Version:
Resolution:  fixed |   Keywords:
Blocked By:|   Blocking:
---+---
Changes (by adamwill):

 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Fedora QA 
Fedora Quality Assurance
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [Fedora QA] #478: Proposed Test Day: Cloud

[Fedora QA]

#478: Proposed Test Day: Cloud
---+---
  Reporter:  roshi |  Owner:
  Type:  defect| Status:  closed
  Priority:  major |  Milestone:  Fedora 23
 Component:  Test Day  |Version:
Resolution:  fixed |   Keywords:
Blocked By:|   Blocking:
---+---
Changes (by adamwill):

 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed


Comment:

 So looks like we wound up with two Cloud test days for F23, thanks
 everyone for helping to organize and test!

 {{{
 Test Day:2015-09-08 Fedora Cloud Base
 Testers: 7, Tests: 51, Bugs: 3, Ratio: 0.428571428571
 Open: 0, Dupe: 1, Fixed: 2, Unfixed: 0, Fixed %: 100.0

 Test Day:2015-09-22 Fedora Cloud Atomic
 Testers: 6, Tests: 46, Bugs: 1, Ratio: 0.1667
 Open: 1, Dupe: 0, Fixed: 0, Unfixed: 0, Fixed %: 0.0

 Events: 2   Tests: 97   Bugs: 4 Testers: 10
 Overall fixed %: 66.67

 Top Testers
 Tester: dustymabe Tests: 25 Bugs: 1265295
 Tester: roshi Tests: 17 Bugs:
 Tester: adimania Tests: 13 Bugs:
 Tester: jasonbrooks Tests: 8 Bugs:
 Tester: msrb Tests: 8 Bugs:
 Tester: maxamillion Tests: 6 Bugs:
 Tester: kushal Tests: 5 Bugs:
 Tester: potty Tests: 5 Bugs:
 Tester: lbrabec Tests: 5 Bugs:
 Tester: pschindl Tests: 5 Bugs:
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Fedora QA 
Fedora Quality Assurance
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [Fedora QA] #477: Proposed Test Day - NetworkManager (2015-08-20)

[Fedora QA]

#477: Proposed Test Day - NetworkManager (2015-08-20)
---+---
  Reporter:  lkundrak  |  Owner:
  Type:  task  | Status:  new
  Priority:  major |  Milestone:  Fedora 23
 Component:  Test Day  |Version:
Resolution:|   Keywords:
Blocked By:|   Blocking:
---+---

Comment (by adamwill):

 Stats:

 {{{
 Test Day:2015-08-20 NetworkManager
 Testers: 7, Tests: 16, Bugs: 3, Ratio: 0.428571428571
 Open: 1, Dupe: 1, Fixed: 1, Unfixed: 0, Fixed %: 50.0
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Fedora QA 
Fedora Quality Assurance
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [Fedora QA] #476: Proposed Test Day - Cinnamon Spin

[Fedora QA]

#476: Proposed Test Day - Cinnamon Spin
---+---
  Reporter:  grinnz|  Owner:  adamwill
  Type:  task  | Status:  closed
  Priority:  major |  Milestone:  Fedora 23
 Component:  Test Day  |Version:
Resolution:  fixed |   Keywords:
Blocked By:|   Blocking:
---+---
Changes (by adamwill):

 * status:  assigned => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Fedora QA 
Fedora Quality Assurance
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [Fedora QA] #474: Proposed Test Day - i18n

[Fedora QA]

#474: Proposed Test Day - i18n
---+---
  Reporter:  tagoh |  Owner:
  Type:  task  | Status:  closed
  Priority:  major |  Milestone:  Fedora 23
 Component:  Test Day  |Version:
Resolution:  fixed |   Keywords:
Blocked By:|   Blocking:
---+---
Changes (by adamwill):

 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Fedora QA 
Fedora Quality Assurance
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [Fedora QA] #474: Proposed Test Day - i18n

[Fedora QA]

#474: Proposed Test Day - i18n
---+---
  Reporter:  tagoh |  Owner:
  Type:  task  | Status:  new
  Priority:  major |  Milestone:  Fedora 23
 Component:  Test Day  |Version:
Resolution:|   Keywords:
Blocked By:|   Blocking:
---+---

Comment (by adamwill):

 The event ran successfully, thanks to everyone who tested and helped
 organize! Stats:

 {{{
 Test Day:2015-09-01 i18n
 Testers: 9, Tests: 47, Bugs: 8, Ratio: 0.8889
 Open: 4, Dupe: 1, Fixed: 3, Unfixed: 0, Fixed %: 42.8571428571
 }}}

 If you want to hold an event for F24 (I'm sure you will since you're all
 awesome i18n folks :>), please just file a new ticket. Thanks!

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Fedora QA 
Fedora Quality Assurance
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [Fedora QA] #476: Proposed Test Day - Cinnamon Spin

[Fedora QA]

#476: Proposed Test Day - Cinnamon Spin
---+---
  Reporter:  grinnz|  Owner:  adamwill
  Type:  task  | Status:  assigned
  Priority:  major |  Milestone:  Fedora 23
 Component:  Test Day  |Version:
Resolution:|   Keywords:
Blocked By:|   Blocking:
---+---

Comment (by adamwill):

 Test day ran successfully, thanks everyone! Stats:


 {{{
 Test Day:2015-10-08 Cinnamon
 Testers: 11, Tests: 77, Bugs: 5, Ratio: 0.454545454545
 Open: 2, Dupe: 1, Fixed: 1, Unfixed: 1, Fixed %: 25.0
 }}}

 If you'd like to have another event for F24, please file a new ticket.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Fedora QA 
Fedora Quality Assurance
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org