Fedora 20 updates-testing report

2014-04-04 Thread updates
The following Fedora 20 Security updates need testing: Age URL 98 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-24018/varnish-3.0.5-1.fc20 79 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-0792/libinfinity-0.5.5-1.fc20 45 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-

Fedora 19 updates-testing report

2014-04-04 Thread updates
The following Fedora 19 Security updates need testing: Age URL 161 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-19963/openstack-glance-2013.1.4-1.fc19 98 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-24023/varnish-3.0.5-1.fc19 79 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FED

Re: Test Maps

2014-04-04 Thread Adam Williamson
On 2014-04-03 17:13, Mike Ruckman wrote: Greetings testers! I've recently been working on a _rough_ proof of concept for my Test Maps [0], idea - and it's just enough done to get the idea across of what I have in mind. As I outlined on my blog, currently our test matrices are large and testcases

Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes

2014-04-04 Thread Al Dunsmuir
On Friday, April 4, 2014, 1:42:49 PM, Matthew Milleru wrote: > On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 11:32:57AM -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote: >> As far as I am concerned they are very useful. In more detail I am >> looking mostly at "Broken deps" and "Summaries", with only an occasional >> peek at a changelog

Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes

2014-04-04 Thread Matthew Miller
On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 11:32:57AM -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote: > As far as I am concerned they are very useful. In more detail I am > looking mostly at "Broken deps" and "Summaries", with only an occasional > peek at a changelog information, but on a number of occasions these > messages were cr

Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes

2014-04-04 Thread Michal Jaegermann
On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 01:14:30PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > [snip] > > Is it useful for these messages to go to the devel (or test, for that > matter) lists? As far as I am concerned they are very useful. In more detail I am looking mostly at "Broken deps" and "Summaries", with only an occa

Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes

2014-04-04 Thread Matthew Miller
[snip] Is it useful for these messages to go to the devel (or test, for that matter) lists? They seem mostly to just raise the noise. -- Matthew Miller-- Fedora Project-- "Tepid change for the somewhat better!" -- test mailing list test@lists.fe

Self-introduction: Anisha Narang

2014-04-04 Thread Anisha Narang
Hi, I am a QA at work and a newbie to the fedora QA community. I have been working with Red Hat, Pune for the past one year. I have majorly done Web testing and written test automation scripts using different tools. I have worked with Selenium(using Python)[1] and currently I am working with Cucum

Re: potential openjdk update issues in rawhide?

2014-04-04 Thread Mukundan Ragavan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 04/04/2014 10:43 AM, Andre Robatino wrote: > Mukundan Ragavan fedoraproject.org> writes: > >> I was updating my Rawhide instance sometime ago and saw this >> interesting transaction (below). It looks like something that >> should not happen ...

Re: potential openjdk update issues in rawhide?

2014-04-04 Thread Andre Robatino
Mukundan Ragavan fedoraproject.org> writes: > I was updating my Rawhide instance sometime ago and saw this > interesting transaction (below). It looks like something that should > not happen Is anyone else seeing this? Is this even an issue? > > I am particularly concerned about lines like

Re: potential openjdk update issues in rawhide?

2014-04-04 Thread Michal Jaegermann
On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 09:47:58AM -0400, Kamil Paral wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > All, > > > > I was updating my Rawhide instance sometime ago and saw this > > interesting transaction (below). It looks like something that should > > not happen Is anyo

Re: Rawhide validation testing matrix proposal

2014-04-04 Thread Adam Williamson
On Fri, 2014-04-04 at 07:00 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 04/04/2014 04:05 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Does this look OK to everyone? Thanks! > > Is not better to have this separated/sorted by milestones ( > alpha/beta/final) Well, the tests within each table are usually ordered

Re: potential openjdk update issues in rawhide?

2014-04-04 Thread Kamil Paral
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > All, > > I was updating my Rawhide instance sometime ago and saw this > interesting transaction (below). It looks like something that should > not happen Is anyone else seeing this? Is this even an issue? I've seen this as well. I assume

Fedora 19 updates-testing report

2014-04-04 Thread updates
The following Fedora 19 Security updates need testing: Age URL 160 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-19963/openstack-glance-2013.1.4-1.fc19 97 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-24023/varnish-3.0.5-1.fc19 79 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FED

Re: Rawhide validation testing matrix proposal

2014-04-04 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/04/2014 04:05 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: Does this look OK to everyone? Thanks! Is not better to have this separated/sorted by milestones ( alpha/beta/final) as well as aligned with Mike's test maps? And this probably should also be tagged with what's applicable to each workgroup so