Re: Fwd: [Fedora Update] [CRITPATH] [old_testing_critpath] mdadm-3.1.3-0.git20100804.2.fc13
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/22/2010 09:49 PM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:04:23 -0400, Clyde E. Kunkel wrote: Care to join us? We don't bite :) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester Actually, I have provided karma on other packages with the fedora-easy-karma program and will do so for mdadm. Thanks for the clarification. The problem here is that mdadm is listed as being in the critical path, meaning that at least one of the +1 votes has to come from a proven tester. It actually has been voted up 4 times, but all by normal testers. If you're familiar with fedora-easy-karma then getting proven tester status should be quite straightforward -- see the page I linked in my earlier post. Thanks, I think in situations like this where there is a plethora of testing, a proventester could give their +1 by proxy, to move the update along. - -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkybDREACgkQ4v2HLvE71NXdawCgmBkfN+5qZ/3g8AZlAVpMmN1p h0EAn2jqEH+8hsYjl7SS46RGPQ9ksZYP =LrEJ -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Fwd: [Fedora Update] [CRITPATH] [old_testing_critpath] mdadm-3.1.3-0.git20100804.2.fc13
Hi Clyde, On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 18:16:23 -0400, Clyde E. Kunkel wrote: I am not a proven packager, but I have been using F13 since the update and have raid 10 in extensive use and have not had any problems. You don't need to be a proven packager, just a proven tester; the names are unfortunately rather similar, but the focus is on testing rather than on packaging. Care to join us? We don't bite :) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester Regards, -- Michel Alexandre Salim Fedora Project Contributor: http://fedoraproject.org/ Email: sali...@fedoraproject.org | GPG key ID: 78884778 Jabber: hir...@jabber.ccc.de | IRC: hir...@irc.freenode.net () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Fwd: [Fedora Update] [CRITPATH] [old_testing_critpath] mdadm-3.1.3-0.git20100804.2.fc13
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 22:16:56 +0100, Adam Williamson wrote: On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 21:50 +0200, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: threshold after which we could assume that the packager *and* testers know what they're doing, and approve the update without testing the affected functionality? We may have to look at something like this if this situation keeps happening. Another thing I mean to do is to patch fedora-easy-karma to allow people to blacklist packages from their update list. Too many people voting 0 and just say not tested right now. Adam, any idea whether this is a good idea or not? On one hand we want people to say hey, I install this update and my machine still boots because that's at least (slightly) informative. But I wonder how many testers we lose by the tedium of seeing the same package over and over again (and yet the packages come with the base system and are rather tedious to remove -- X drivers, RAID utilities and so on) -- Michel Alexandre Salim Fedora Project Contributor: http://fedoraproject.org/ Email: sali...@fedoraproject.org | GPG key ID: 78884778 Jabber: hir...@jabber.ccc.de | IRC: hir...@irc.freenode.net () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Fwd: [Fedora Update] [CRITPATH] [old_testing_critpath] mdadm-3.1.3-0.git20100804.2.fc13
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/22/2010 01:27 AM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: the names are unfortunately rather similar They were chosen to be similar :) - -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkyaQjQACgkQ4v2HLvE71NVFOACfZcWmUhcIer8prek/lUhgnehN zpIAoK74TFaZjg6THv2VZ++4KWxnCwj1 =ryga -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Fwd: [Fedora Update] [CRITPATH] [old_testing_critpath] mdadm-3.1.3-0.git20100804.2.fc13
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 10:51:48 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: On 09/22/2010 01:27 AM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: the names are unfortunately rather similar They were chosen to be similar :) Bad wording on my part. In most cases that's intended, but in this particular case it does evidently cause (a bit of) confusion. Looking back, though, I just realized that I am the one who started by mixing up the two terms. One shalt not do one's mailing list business at close to 10 PM local time :) -- Michel Alexandre Salim Fedora Project Contributor: http://fedoraproject.org/ Email: sali...@fedoraproject.org | GPG key ID: 78884778 Jabber: hir...@jabber.ccc.de | IRC: hir...@irc.freenode.net () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Fwd: [Fedora Update] [CRITPATH] [old_testing_critpath] mdadm-3.1.3-0.git20100804.2.fc13
On 09/22/2010 04:27 AM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: Hi Clyde, On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 18:16:23 -0400, Clyde E. Kunkel wrote: I am not a proven packager, but I have been using F13 since the update and have raid 10 in extensive use and have not had any problems. You don't need to be a proven packager, just a proven tester; the names are unfortunately rather similar, but the focus is on testing rather than on packaging. Care to join us? We don't bite :) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester Regards, Actually, I have provided karma on other packages with the fedora-easy-karma program and will do so for mdadm. Thanks for the clarification. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Fwd: [Fedora Update] [CRITPATH] [old_testing_critpath] mdadm-3.1.3-0.git20100804.2.fc13
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:04:23 -0400, Clyde E. Kunkel wrote: Care to join us? We don't bite :) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester Actually, I have provided karma on other packages with the fedora-easy-karma program and will do so for mdadm. Thanks for the clarification. The problem here is that mdadm is listed as being in the critical path, meaning that at least one of the +1 votes has to come from a proven tester. It actually has been voted up 4 times, but all by normal testers. If you're familiar with fedora-easy-karma then getting proven tester status should be quite straightforward -- see the page I linked in my earlier post. Thanks, -- Michel Alexandre Salim Fedora Project Contributor: http://fedoraproject.org/ Email: sali...@fedoraproject.org | GPG key ID: 78884778 Jabber: hir...@jabber.ccc.de | IRC: hir...@irc.freenode.net () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Fwd: [Fedora Update] [CRITPATH] [old_testing_critpath] mdadm-3.1.3-0.git20100804.2.fc13
Adam Williamson awilliam at redhat.com writes: Adam, any idea whether this is a good idea or not? On one hand we want people to say hey, I install this update and my machine still boots because that's at least (slightly) informative. But I wonder how many testers we lose by the tedium of seeing the same package over and over again (and yet the packages come with the base system and are rather tedious to remove -- X drivers, RAID utilities and so on) I dunno, really, I guess I'm kinda neutral on it. I don't find it that hard to just hit 's' (which I use for 'skip' an update I don't want to comment on...), but hey. AFAICT, hitting 's' and Enter is the same as just hitting Enter - either way, if you immediately rerun f-e-k, you see the update again. I've been using Firefox's AwesomeBar as a substitute - when I copy and paste each URL into the browser to look at the Bodhi page, if the AwesomeBar shows a match, I've been there before. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Fwd: [Fedora Update] [CRITPATH] [old_testing_critpath] mdadm-3.1.3-0.git20100804.2.fc13
On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 21:50 +0200, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: Dear fellow testers, What should be done in a situation as described below? Looks like a critical bug, 4 registered users who are affected actually chimed in and the response is entirely positive, but there is no provenpackager to test (I certainly don't have a RAID array to test). Should we encourage one of the reporters to become proven testers? Or is there a This would certainly be the optimal solution. threshold after which we could assume that the packager *and* testers know what they're doing, and approve the update without testing the affected functionality? We may have to look at something like this if this situation keeps happening. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Fwd: [Fedora Update] [CRITPATH] [old_testing_critpath] mdadm-3.1.3-0.git20100804.2.fc13
On 09/21/2010 03:50 PM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: Dear fellow testers, What should be done in a situation as described below? Looks like a critical bug, 4 registered users who are affected actually chimed in and the response is entirely positive, but there is no provenpackager to test (I certainly don't have a RAID array to test). Should we encourage one of the reporters to become proven testers? Or is there a threshold after which we could assume that the packager *and* testers know what they're doing, and approve the update without testing the affected functionality? Thanks, I am not a proven packager, but I have been using F13 since the update and have raid 10 in extensive use and have not had any problems. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
