#282: Test Day proposal - ABRT & deduplication service
----------------------+------------------------
Reporter: rmarko | Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 17
Component: Test Day | Version:
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
----------------------+------------------------
We propose a test day for ABRT and deduplication infrastructure for
2012-04-19. It will be similar to the previous one with focus on
deduplication service. We probably won't need any assistance from qa team.
Feature page:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ABRTBacktraceDeduplication
Thanks!
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/282>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
#276: Gnome Boxes Test Day
----------------------+------------------------
Reporter: vbenes | Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 17
Component: Test Day | Version:
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
----------------------+------------------------
we need to schedule test day for gnome boxes, it's a new feature, I can
visit test day to help anybody that needs it
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/276>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
#269: Proposed Test Day - Virtualization
----------------------+------------------------
Reporter: jforbes | Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 17
Component: Test Day | Version:
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
----------------------+------------------------
We propose a Fedora Virtualization Test Day For 04/12. This test day will
cover several of the updates to the virtualization stack
I will be more than happy to plan/host the test day. Some previous test
plans will be brought forth, as new test plans added for the newest
features.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/269>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
#267: Proposed Test Day - OpenStack
-----------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: russellb | Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 17
Component: Test Day | Version:
Keywords: | Blocking:
Blocked By: |
-----------------------+-----------------------
I would like to propose a test day.
= Ownership =
I'm happy to host and organize the test day myself.
= Time frame =
I would prefer to take March 8th. My second choice would be March 15.
= Feature =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/OpenStack_Essex
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/267>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
#266: Test Anaconda memory requirements for F17
-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------
Reporter: adamwill | Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 17
Component: Test Review | Version:
Keywords: |
-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------
In F15 the hard RAM floor for anaconda was bumped up to 640MB or so
because of the increased requirements in that release. F16 decreased the
actual RAM usage of anaconda and F17 decreases it again, so we need to do
some real-world testing on how little RAM you can get away with for an F17
install, and advise the anaconda team and docs teams to adjust the hard
floor and stated system requirements accordingly.
It's easy enough to test: just use a VM and change the amount of RAM it
has. We'd want to use an image with an anaconda build with the hard floor
removed, though.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/266>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
#265: Fedora 17 X Test Week
----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------
Reporter: adamwill | Owner: adamwill
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 17
Component: Test Day | Version:
Keywords: |
----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------
We should have an X Test Week as usual for F17. I guess I'll run it again
this cycle.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/265>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
#264: Request for F17 Power Management test day
-----------------------------------------+----------------------------------
Reporter: jskarvad | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: Proventester Mentor Request | Version:
Keywords: |
-----------------------------------------+----------------------------------
We would like to run the F17 Power Management test day. We expect it to be
similar to our previous F16 Power Management test day. We will also try to
prepare the Live CD for this event (as for F16). We suggest 2012-04-05 but
probalby any date would fit to us.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/264>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
#263: Expand Xen test case set
----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------
Reporter: adamwill | Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 17
Component: Wiki | Version:
Keywords: |
----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------
After checking with the Xen experts on list, it became clear that it would
be a good idea to somewhat improve and extend our set of Xen test cases:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-November/104654.html
Konrad Wilk summarizes:
"It would be nice to expand the tests, and it kind of boils down to:
1) Does it boot
2) Does it work
The complexity is that there are three modes of this: HVM (so similar to
the KVM test-case), PV (we got that covered now), and the Dom0 (which is
mostly - does it boot and you kind of implicitly need to do this before
you can do the other two).
So I think it makes sense to add the HVM case in the test-matrix - it is
pretty simple and similar to the KVM one.
The dom0 is a bit more complex, but we already have it outlined in the
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/XenPvopsDom0 in the Documentation
part - so it should be fairly easy to lift it out of there. (adn the stuff
about the bridge is not needed anymore)."
If someone with knowledge of the area could take this ticket and draft up
the set of proposed test cases then mail them to the list for discussion,
that would be great. Thanks!
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/263>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
#82: Update existing dual-boot tests and add to test plan
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
Reporter: jlaska | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 14
Component: Wiki | Version:
Keywords: retrospective |
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
= problem =
See [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=590661
RHBZ#590661 - GRUB bootloader should have a few seconds delay on a multi-
boot setup]
= analysis =
Due to RHBZ #590661, the dual-boot experience was not well understood and
tested for the final release. It was discovered late and unclear whether
this behavior was critical to Fedora success.
= enhancement recommendation =
Recommend updating existing dual-boot test cases, and create new test as
needed, to reflect updated dual-boot release criteria. Also, add tests to
the install matrix (depends on ticket#80).
The current tests concern dual-booting windows and Mac. I believe Mac is
no longer a primary concern. However, we may wish to add a test for dual-
booting Ubuntu or even Fedora.
See existing dual-boot tests at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Installer_Dual_Boot_Test_Cases
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/82>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance