On 12/14/2013 01:49 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2013-12-13 at 15:49 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 13, 2013, at 3:13 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
I meant to write this test case anyhow, but today's brown paper bag bug
-
On mán 16.des 2013 20:32, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 12:23 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
Right now me, James Laska, Will Woods and Jesse Keating are the admins
of the QA group. This is obviously a bit silly. I'll drop jlaska's,
wwoods' and jesses' admin roles, and make some
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 20:40 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On mán 16.des 2013 20:23, Adam Williamson wrote:
How does that sound? Seems like something we can just get done already.
It sounds like a bad plan revoke the QA group previously occupied and
manage by RH staff only and I'm
On Dec 16, 2013, at 1:47 PM, nonamedotc nonamed...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/11/2013 06:57 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 11, 2013, at 5:41 PM, Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2013-12-11 at 17:25 -0600, nonamedotc wrote:
Is anyone still seeing this? Just curious as I
On 12/16/2013 03:09 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 16, 2013, at 1:47 PM, nonamedotc nonamed...@gmail.com wrote:
I might be **misunderstanding** - but with the kernel-3.12.5-301, the suspend
issue seems to be gone (in my tests - 3 repetitions).
Suspend *seems to work* without issues - Is
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 12:23:32 -0800
Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
So I'm proposing we do something simple: let's just go ahead and stick
everyone who can reasonably be considered a 'QA team member' in the
FAS 'qa' group. This wouldn't be hard to do, I can make sure
sufficient
On mán 16.des 2013 21:00, Adam Williamson wrote:
Even though we don't really have a lot of use for the FAS group,
None what so ever.
Fedora
as a whole is set up such that 'being a member of a FAS group' is a bar
to entry for some things,
Not with us and never should be.
so it seems
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 21:35 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On mán 16.des 2013 21:00, Adam Williamson wrote:
Even though we don't really have a lot of use for the FAS group,
None what so ever.
Actually, there is one, I forgot to mention it: we can have 'qa' inherit
'fedorabugs', which
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 21:35:56 +
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote:
On mán 16.des 2013 21:00, Adam Williamson wrote:
Even though we don't really have a lot of use for the FAS group,
None what so ever.
Fedora
as a whole is set up such that 'being a member of a FAS
On 12/16/2013 03:35 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On mán 16.des 2013 21:00, Adam Williamson wrote:
Even though we don't really have a lot of use for the FAS group,
None what so ever.
Fedora
as a whole is set up such that 'being a member of a FAS group' is a bar
to entry for some
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 14:09 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 16, 2013, at 1:47 PM, nonamedotc nonamed...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/11/2013 06:57 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 11, 2013, at 5:41 PM, Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2013-12-11 at 17:25 -0600, nonamedotc
On mán 16.des 2013 21:48, Dan Mossor wrote:
I may be misinterpreting, but what do you have against volunteers?
Especially since Fedora is a volunteer-driven project?
Dont fall into whatever game Adam is playing by reviving this group.
JBG
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
On Dec 16, 2013, at 2:50 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 14:09 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 16, 2013, at 1:47 PM, nonamedotc nonamed...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/11/2013 06:57 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 11, 2013, at 5:41 PM, Ankur Sinha
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 21:57:41 +,
\Jóhann B. Guðmundsson\ johan...@gmail.com wrote:
On mán 16.des 2013 21:48, Dan Mossor wrote:
I may be misinterpreting, but what do you have against volunteers?
Especially since Fedora is a volunteer-driven project?
Dont fall into whatever game Adam
On mán 16.des 2013 21:45, Mike Ruckman wrote:
For those of us who haven't been with QA for even a year yet, can you
give a brief too long; didn't read synopsis of your reasoning and
where it stems from? Without some form of background it's hard to infer
what your reasoning is.
You can look at
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 22:06:44 +,
\Jóhann B. Guðmundsson\ johan...@gmail.com wrote:
Adam is right about what's wrong but as so often he's trying to fix
it in the wrong place...
Access to those reources are controlled by group membership. So we either
add people to a group or get the
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 21:57 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On mán 16.des 2013 21:48, Dan Mossor wrote:
I may be misinterpreting, but what do you have against volunteers?
Especially since Fedora is a volunteer-driven project?
Dont fall into whatever game Adam is playing by reviving
On Dec 16, 2013, at 3:06 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote:
On mán 16.des 2013 21:45, Mike Ruckman wrote:
For those of us who haven't been with QA for even a year yet, can you
give a brief too long; didn't read synopsis of your reasoning and
where it stems from? Without
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 22:06 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On mán 16.des 2013 21:45, Mike Ruckman wrote:
For those of us who haven't been with QA for even a year yet, can you
give a brief too long; didn't read synopsis of your reasoning and
where it stems from? Without some form of
On mán 16.des 2013 22:08, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 22:06:44 +,
\Jóhann B. Guðmundsson\ johan...@gmail.com wrote:
Adam is right about what's wrong but as so often he's trying to fix
it in the wrong place...
Access to those reources are controlled by group
On mán 16.des 2013 22:10, Adam Williamson wrote:
I'm not playing any game...in fact, the thing that prompted me to
finally write this email was Dan asking on #fedora-qa if there was a FAS
group we could put him in so he'd have fedorapeople space!
The limit that group entirely with providing
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 22:16 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On mán 16.des 2013 22:10, Adam Williamson wrote:
I'm not playing any game...in fact, the thing that prompted me to
finally write this email was Dan asking on #fedora-qa if there was a FAS
group we could put him in so he'd have
On mán 16.des 2013 22:22, Adam Williamson wrote:
If you mean Then limit that group entirely with providing him and
others with that. - well, that's already what we'd be doing. The
proposal isn't to make the QA group required for anything at all in
relation to QA. The proposal is just to add all
On mán 16.des 2013 22:12, Adam Williamson wrote:
What, in your estimation, would be the right place? Instead of just
saying 'no', can you provide an alternative solution to the problem?
Solution to fix this lies not within in us ( QA ) the alternative
solution requires a real change in the
I'm still scratching my head over the other applications not
saving/restoring correctly, but xfce4-terminal at least is fixed in an
update I just pushed.
Testing and karma welcome:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xfce4-terminal-0.6.2-3.fc19
On 12/16/2013 04:06 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 21:57:41 +,
The game is to treat QA volunteers like other contributors. That way
they don't have to also become packagers (or something else) in order to
participate in Fedora Elections or make use of resources
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 22:26:08 +
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote:
On mán 16.des 2013 22:22, Adam Williamson wrote:
If you mean Then limit that group entirely with providing him and
others with that. - well, that's already what we'd be doing. The
proposal isn't to make
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 22:33:05 +
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote:
On mán 16.des 2013 22:12, Adam Williamson wrote:
What, in your estimation, would be the right place? Instead of just
saying 'no', can you provide an alternative solution to the problem?
Solution to fix
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
The game is to treat QA volunteers like other contributors.
That way they don't have to also become packagers (or
something else) in order to participate in Fedora Elections
or make use of resources limited to people who are in more
than just
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 22:26 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On mán 16.des 2013 22:22, Adam Williamson wrote:
If you mean Then limit that group entirely with providing him and
others with that. - well, that's already what we'd be doing. The
proposal isn't to make the QA group required
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 22:33 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On mán 16.des 2013 22:12, Adam Williamson wrote:
What, in your estimation, would be the right place? Instead of just
saying 'no', can you provide an alternative solution to the problem?
Solution to fix this lies not within in
The following Fedora 19 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
79
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-17836/davfs2-1.4.7-3.fc19
59
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-19262/quassel-0.9.1-1.fc19
51
The following Fedora 18 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
240
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-6117/eucalyptus-3.2.2-1.fc18
87
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-17195/spice-gtk-0.18-3.fc18
81
On Sun, 2013-12-15 at 20:18 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
Hi, folks. So I've had this on my todo list for the last three weeks
(oops...):
adamw to draft a new test case and matrix row for validating cloud
image checksums
So I finally got around to doing it. Looking at how to integrate a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Let me make sure I have this correct. {I had to read 20+ emails to
condense it, I may have missed something}
PROBLEM STATEMENT: There exists and will continue to exist persons who
participate in and assist the QA process in quantifiable ways. These
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 20:12 -0500, Bob Lightfoot wrote:
Let me make sure I have this correct. {I had to read 20+ emails to
condense it, I may have missed something}
PROBLEM STATEMENT: There exists and will continue to exist persons who
participate in and assist the QA process in quantifiable
On 12/16/2013 04:38 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
I'm still scratching my head over the other applications not
saving/restoring correctly, but xfce4-terminal at least is fixed in an
update I just pushed.
Testing and karma welcome:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xfce4-terminal-0.6.2-3.fc19
On Fri, 2013-12-13 at 14:13 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
I meant to write this test case anyhow, but today's brown paper bag bug
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1040669 - gives
it a certain sense of importance, so I thought I'd best get it done now.
I wrote
Thank you for the summary Bob. I was necessary.
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 20:12 -0500, Bob Lightfoot wrote:
Let me make sure I have this correct. {I had to read 20+ emails to
condense it, I may have missed something}
PROBLEM STATEMENT: There exists and will continue to exist persons who
Ahoy,
So, I am with Adam on this one (I'm not a mod?). I've been +1 for this
idea for quite some time now.
Johann, I've been around for a long time, even longer than Adam, and I don't
remember the original purpose for the QA group; I do vaguely recall James
Laska telling me it had some purpose
So I'm proposing we do something simple: let's just go ahead and stick
everyone who can reasonably be considered a 'QA team member' in the FAS
'qa' group. This wouldn't be hard to do, I can make sure sufficient
people within and outside RH have moderator status in the qa group, and
then
On Dec 16, 2013 1:23 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi, folks. So this one keeps popping up for individual people, and we
keep doing a quick band-aid when anyone needs group membership...but we
may as well just bite the bullet and do it properly.
Fedora QA has always been
On 12/16/2013 11:38 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
I'm still scratching my head over the other applications not
saving/restoring correctly, but xfce4-terminal at least is fixed in an
update I just pushed.
Thanks for taking care about this issue.
Testing and karma welcome:
43 matches
Mail list logo
