On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 12:18 PM Adam Williamson
<adamwill(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2023-04-25 at 13:49 +0200, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 11:39 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Is there a way we can add regular testing for it without making it a
> > > blocker then?
> > >
> >
> > For popular third-party software, I think this testing occurs quite
> > naturally - people just use it. E.g. Steam, Chrome, VSCode, etc. I've been
> > running Steam on F38 since Beta (and it helped me to discover an issue in
> > mutter, which was later accepted as a blocker - but not because of Steam,
> > but because of general issues). But if you want to have an explicit test
> > case, Adam described how to do it. We could also have a test day for
> > popular third-party software, if it makes sense.
>
> To be fair, we did miss
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2177287 (I missed it
> because I run Steam via Flatpak, not RPM). So we do have scope to
> improve there. I do think testing commonly used third-party stuff is a
> good idea, to be clear, and I'm all in favor of adding optional test
> cases for it.
And I'm fine with us adding some optional test cases for this. Would
running a test day each cycle also be possible?
I don't see any reason why not! Sumantro puts out a call for test days
each cycle, or you could just go ahead and file a ticket for one at
now (give it the 'test days' tag and
the Fedora 39 milestone). Sumantro is in charge of that process, and
there's a lot of flexibility in terms of who is mainly responsible for
running each individual test day; you can certainly take an active role
in setting it up and running it if you'd like to.
--
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @adamw(a)fosstodon.org