Results for F39 to F41 upgrades tests

Hello, as promised, I am sending the results of the upgrade tests from F39 to F41. *Test 1: Upgrade from F39 to F41 using Software* When Software is used to perform the upgrade, the mentioned applications, Camera and Ptyxis, *do not *get installed on the upgraded system, however *Test 2: Upgrade

Re: PROPOSAL to remove Modularity tests from openQA

I have removed everything, however, sometimes a "git revert" tends to cause conflicts, but you are right, this should be fine with the files. Lukas On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 9:13 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2023-07-19 at 13:37 +0200, Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > >

Re: PROPOSAL to remove Modularity tests from openQA

:29 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2023-07-17 at 10:47 +0200, Kamil Paral wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 10:20 AM Lukas Ruzicka > wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > based on this ( > > > > https://pagure.io/fedora-comps/c/38890fd5

PROPOSAL to remove Modularity tests from openQA

Hello, based on this ( https://pagure.io/fedora-comps/c/38890fd54281a3dc2dd64439de8955637ca6f2a7?branch=main), I am proposing to put the Modularity tests on hold for some time (modular features are currently not supported in DNF5 anyway) and potentially remove them from openQA. -- Lukáš Růžička

Re: introduction

Hello GrumpyFfyon, welcome. What would you like to spend your time on? If you need any tips, let me know. Lukas On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 1:11 PM fedtest--- via test < test@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > hello all, > > I'm very glad to apply to volunteer at the Fedora > Test Team. > I first

Re: Error in Fedora 38 with texlive amb memoir class

On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 11:25 AM Rafel Amer wrote: > I have a simple TeX document test.tex > > \documentclass[12pt,a4paper]{memoir} > > \begin{document} > > This is a test > > \end{document} > > > But, if I run the same command if Fedora 38-beta, I get the following error > > I am experiencing th

Re: new criterion proposal: Window manager functionality

I could probably live with both versions, the Ben's one working a little more straightforward to me. On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 1:59 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 5:48 AM Kamil Paral wrote: > > > > The desktop environment must work correctly when displaying common > application co

Re: F38 dnf modules isn't going to be functional

On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 3:20 PM Frantisek Zatloukal wrote: > But that's microdnf, not the current default dnf. I don't think microdnf > was used by default in any of our blocking spins/images. > Totally correct. Thanks for the clarification. ___ test m

Re: Last known Good for Rawhide (Server Edition) -- Not Good

> > > > So I did. I created the USB with Fedora Media Writer and it worked! > I am sending this mail from the box. I now have added respect for > Fedora Media Writer, more than ever before. I always ran to Rufus in > the past. > That is interesting. Maybe you could open an issue with the Rufus,

Re: Proposal: make meetings officially every other week

+1 I agree, we can always meet in between if there is need. On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 8:50 PM Tim Flink wrote: > +1 > > I assume that additional meetings would be an option if the need presents > itself, though. > > Tim > > On 10/31/22 07:38, Luna Jernberg wrote: > > +1 > > > > On Mon, Oct 31, 202

Re: Chromium doesn't respond to clicks or typing in 1 external monitor

> As I said this really is weird. But if anyone is interested I can file a > bug and do further testing. > Please, do. Thanks. > > Thank you. > > Fred > ___ > test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to test-le

Re: Upgrade blocker /usr/bin/WebKitWebDriver

Hello, have you fully updated your system before trying to perform the upgrade? The recommended workflow is: 1. dnf update --refresh 2. dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=37 You might want to use the following arguments with the second command that will remove conflicting packages a

Re: F37 seems to require a reboot after updates of firmware packages in order for firefox to run.

Hello Stan, I do not experience this behaviour with Fedora 37. The only thing that happens to Firefox is that *it requires to be restarted* when the application gets an upgrade using the DNF way. In that case, I hit "Restart Firefox" button that comes with the message and my Firefox closes and

Re: Loud PC speaker beep during reboot, sometimes

I am also experiencing this behaviour, but as I used to hear computers making any kinds of funny noises in the past, I am not bothered by this, so I did not even notice it. My laptops are Lenovo P1 and Lenovo T580. They both produce the beep sounds. On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 2:28 AM AV via test wro

Re: Please help us test: Fedora Media Writer 5.0

Sorry, I already opened it. Feel free to close it then. On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 2:36 PM Jan Grulich wrote: > I have a fix already for the "Fedora Server" showing "version 0". No need > to open a bug for that. > ___ > test mailing list -- test@lists.fedo

Re: Please help us test: Fedora Media Writer 5.0

Also, there is no way to download and create a Netinst image. I understand that this is a feature, probably, but there might be situations when this would come in handy. On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 1:56 PM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > Hello, > when I want to download a Server image, it does no

Re: Please help us test: Fedora Media Writer 5.0

Hello, when I want to download a Server image, it does not show anything, just a 0. https://imgur.com/a/ZoOE1Y1 On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 1:39 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > I tested the Windows version on Windows 10, and found FMW to be working > well, except perhaps one minor issue: > > Restoring a fla

Re: Is 20220401.n.0 still the primary focus for testing?

Hello Ian, I do not think it is. With some new additions that had been made before the Final freeze, the 20220401 is outdated. Please, focus on the latest composes. Lukas On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 7:58 AM Ian Laurie wrote: > I was wondering if the 20220401.n.0 compose was still the main focus for

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers (take #2)

> Thanks Kamil! So the next step would be to draft test cases for the > additional blocking functionality. Do we have a plan for that? > I can suggest something as I would like to convert it into OpenQA later, so I might hit two targets with one arrow. Luk > -- > Adam Williamson > Fedora QA >

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers (take #2)

The criteria looks good to me, but I agree that it might be a double edged sword to say that *The package manager must never make the system enter an inconsistent or unbootable state* as suggested. An explanatory note is also a good thing to have. However I am not convinced that the wording needs t

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers

My personal preference is *works decently* of course. My old self keeps calling from the history of times something like "I have told you that Linux kicks ass and Windows kick balls." On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 5:07 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 10:41 AM Lukas Ruz

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers

I assume we are talking about a GUI software manager and not DNF. I also assume that we want to deliver a user friendly package manager that is a pleasure to work with. On that assumption: *Scenario 1: Blocking*. You do not want to restart an application any time you want to start doing another op

Re: Proposal: Migrate “Common Bugs” from the wiki to Ask Fedora

I am speaking for myself and not on Fedora QE's behalf, but I believe that this might work. Maintaining one Common Bug page should not be a problem, even if it is on another platform. I also like the idea to make this the support and triage page of the first instance, as we need to increase the co

Re: Keyboard layout criterion update proposal

No problem with that wording. +1 On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 10:26 AM Kamil Paral wrote: > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 9:06 PM Adam Williamson < > adamw...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > >> Hey folks! Before I forget, here's a proposal for a tweak to the >> existing criterion regarding keyboard layouts: >>

Re: zram0 issue on F35 Beta

I would on the contrary advise not to do it manually, as there is a possibility to miss out a package and then the upgrade will not work. It is easy to use *koji* on the command line: 1. Install koji: *sudo dnf install koji* 2. Create an empty directory to download the packages to: *mkdir

Re: [Proposal] Remove the QA:Testcase_desktop_app_basic - archive manager from matrix

Yes, that sounds fine. I wanted to point to a situation where the line could be misleading to people who do not know about Nautilus having the archiving function and who would keep looking for a standalone app. Luk On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 2:06 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 1:1

Re: Basic criterion proposal: g-i-s shouldn't take 2 minutes to launch

What if we replaced the "10 seconds" with something like "reasonably fast". With different machines people could have different expectations, so somebody could consider 10 seconds a long time, while others could take 20 for normal. This could make more room for usual experience and expectations. O

Re: [Proposal] Remove the QA:Testcase_desktop_app_basic - archive manager from matrix

Answers are here. > 1. Are we sure that dropping file-roller is intentional and not a bug in > comps? It might be worth checking with the Workstation SIG. > Yes, it is intentional. 2. By "removing" the test case, do you mean the following, or something > else? > * graying out the Workstation ce

Re: [Proposal] Remove the QA:Testcase_desktop_app_basic - archive manager from matrix

Hi Kamil, let me get the answer for question 1 at first. Luk On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 2:40 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 2:55 PM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> I am proposing to remove the $subj from the Desktop matrix (Workstation >&

Re: Fedora QA Meeting Today 13-09/2021

I do not think so, there will be a Blocker Review meeting at 16 UTC. Luk. On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 2:48 PM Luna Jernberg wrote: > Hello! > > Will there be any Fedora QA Meeting today or not? > ___ > test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org > T

[Proposal] Remove the QA:Testcase_desktop_app_basic - archive manager from matrix

Hello, I am proposing to remove the $subj from the Desktop matrix (Workstation related) cause the archive manager no longer is an installed application and its functionality has been taken by Nautilus, so it will be tested as part of Nautilus testing. What do you think? -- Lukáš Růžička FEDOR

Re: I want to join your team

Hello Igor, the release validation testing is a great place to start and very much needed cause there is a lot to be tested regularly. You can find more here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Lukas On Mon, Jul 5, 2

Re: pipewire in rawhide isn't working for me, no sound. Any pulseaudio / pipewire migration links welcome.

Hello Stan, I would say that switching to PulseAudio from PipeWire on F35 is an ugly hack that you should try to avoid as much as possible. On Fedora 34, PulseAudio was replaced by PipeWire which is the default sound solution for Fedora 34. This is the same for Fedora 35. If you are having proble

Re: Introduction - Max R.

Hello Max, you can join to take part in release validation testing, for example https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_35_Rawhide_20210615.n.1_Desktop?rd=Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test . By doing this: - you will be extremely helpful as there is a lot of tests to be tested reg

Re: Mentor/Sponsor please

Hello, I am not sure what you mean by a "sponsos" but if it means you have someone to ask questions, then you can ask me anytime. Could you perhaps make clear what test process you have been lead through by sumantro? Have you seen the test matrices for release validation tests? If not, this is a

Re: [Proposal] The dual monitor set-up criterion (Final Version)

Hello friends of Fedora, the Dual Monitor Set-Up criterion is now *LIVE.* For details, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_34_Final_Release_Criteria#Dual_Monitor_Set-Up Lukas On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 7:54 PM Chris Murphy wrote: > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 2:27 AM Lukas Ruzicka wr

[Proposal] The dual monitor set-up criterion (Final Version)

Hello friends of Fedora, please see the final version of the dual monitor criterion. This is the last chance for you to suggest anything you would like to see inside (or remove from it). *"On computers using two monitors (e.g. two monitors on a desktop, or the built-in and one external monitor

Re: Call for interviews for user research on QA landing page

Hello Linda, I can also try to help. It depends what you need to know :D Lukas On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 4:45 PM Linda Okorie wrote: > Hello everyone, > I am currently working with the Fedora QA landing page project that is > attempting to deal with the frustrations of contributing and onboarding

[Proposal] The dual monitor set-up criterion (Is "dual head" redrafted)

Hello friends of Fedora, I would like to thank you for your reactions to the first draft of the dual monitor criterion. There were lots of remarks and suggestions, and I would like to present the second draft of the criterion. I have really tried to formulate it on a rather permissive basis *The

Re: pipewire and high-res audio

Hello, what happened when you tried to reload the services (or restarting computer)? Did it work then or has pipewire been crashing constantly since then? Let's ignore the Abrt stuff, as it is probably not related to pipewire anyhow. Lukas On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 2:37 AM Richard Ryniker wrote: >

Re: [Proposal] The dual head set-up criterion

sed when these things do not work with a single (main) monitor. Lukas On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 1:53 AM Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2021-04-01 at 23:36 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 1:12 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 3

Re: newbie question about the Branched version

On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 4:56 AM David wrote: > > Does anything exciting happen during that time ? > Hello, Ben has already answered the organisational stuff, but if you have asked because you wanted to know how safe it is to use the Beta version, my reply would be that it is generally safe enoug

Re: [Proposal] The dual head set-up criterion

Thanks for your view. On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 3:45 PM Richard Ryniker wrote: > > desktops to work with multiple displays on erery architecture. It is > desirable, yes, but this sounds like a QA attempt to control development. > No, this is not a QA attempt to control development. This is a rea

[Proposal] The dual head set-up criterion

Hello friends of Fedora, I would like to propose a new release covering criterion that was suggested on the yesterday's Blocker Review Meeting. Please let me know, what you think about it and perhaps suggest improvements. Target: *Preferably Beta* *Proposal 1 (conservative criterion)* *On compu

Re: Unable to install Fedora-34-20210228.n.0 to VMware Workstation

I am not sure by 100%, but your problems can be connected with this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1931070. But if so, you can try this: - install Fedora Workstation (with Gnome) - if it has installed successfully, install the KDE Plasma Group - install the KDE Plasma us

Re: [Proposal] Test Cases for the Fedora Audio Test Day.

Hello Jetsaman, this has been the first time I have seen you in this thread, so I am not sure who you are. I tried to answer to Joseph Pesco why the tests were designed for bare-metal. Now it turns out, they can be performed without issues on VMs, too. If you are not Joseph Pesco, I believe that

Re: [Proposal] Test Cases for the Fedora Audio Test Day.

> > > You can set up usb passthrough through virt-manager or VirtualBox. After > you do that, the guest gains complete control of that usb device and it > should work/behave like it wasn't even in a vm. > I can confirm that you can use USB Passthrough to send the USB sound cards to the Virtual Mac

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

Hello friends of Fedora, The Final Release Criterion that deals with basic sound recording as proposed in this list has been added to Fedora 34 Final Release Criteria ( https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_34_Final_Release_Criteria#Recording_Basics ) and thus comes into force immediately. Thank

Re: [Proposal] Test Cases for the Fedora Audio Test Day.

> You can set up usb passthrough through virt-manager or VirtualBox. After > you do that, the guest gains complete control of that usb device and it > should work/behave like it wasn't even in a vm. > > You can get there through "Show virtual hardware details", "Add Hardware", > "USB Host Device",

Re: [Proposal] Test Cases for the Fedora Audio Test Day.

Some of them can be run in a VM for sure, but you might run into unknown waters when it comes to using USB external sound cards and some kind of application sound routing, because you might not be able to simulate that in the VM, where the sound device is just a bridge to the real one on the hardwa

Re: [Proposal] Test Cases for the Fedora Audio Test Day.

> > > > The testcases to me look good, lets fix a date for the test day!! > Sudhir suggested to have two Fedora Audio Test Days. One should be as soon as possible, the other could be later in the cycle, but definitely soon enough to enable fixing of possible issues. Lukas > -- > //sumantro >

Re: [Proposal] Test Cases for the Fedora Audio Test Day.

The current version of the test cases for Fedora Audio Test Day are here: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_PipeWire_PipeWire_default - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_PipeWire_PipeWire_CLI - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_PipeWire_ALSA_backend - h

Re: [Proposal] Test Cases for the Fedora Audio Test Day.

> Just add > [[Category:Test Days Test Cases]] > to the bottom of each testcase. That will make them show up in the > category. > > You can also add > [[Category:Package_pipewire_test_cases]] > and it will make Bodhi show your testcases for all pipewire updates. > Cool, thanks. > day, perhaps th

Re: [Proposal] Test Cases for the Fedora Audio Test Day.

> > Overall it looks very good. Note that some time ago I created a special > category for "test day's test cases", and so let's put all of those in when > moving them into the final location: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Test_Days_Test_Cases > Since those testcases are related to the

Re: [Proposal] Test Cases for the Fedora Audio Test Day.

Thank you, Kamil, for the review, I will work on it tomorrow again to incorporate the suggestions. Lukas On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 4:00 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 2:28 PM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > >> List of test cases to test that: >> >>- Pip

Re: [Proposal] Test Cases for the Fedora Audio Test Day.

/wiki/User:Lruzicka/QA:Testcase_audio_selected_apps Have a nice day. On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 12:33 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 11:37 AM Lukas Ruzicka > wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 11:09 AM Kamil Paral wrote: >> >>> Oh, one more question. Can you

Re: [Proposal] Test Cases for the Fedora Audio Test Day.

> > So you say there's no need to change the Basic Audio test case [1] yet > there is a testcase for it [2], which on a proper look is called slightly > different but basically the same. Would it make sense to either rename it > to something that is less interchangeable, or unify it into a single t

Re: [Proposal] Test Cases for the Fedora Audio Test Day.

> > > "This test case can be performed on both bare machines." doesn't make > sense to me. > Originally I thought that some tests could be done on VMs, too, but then I thought that I do not want it, cause it may only cause some troubles. This is a remnant which I overlooked. > > "Boot the system

Re: [Proposal] Test Cases for the Fedora Audio Test Day.

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 11:09 AM Kamil Paral wrote: > On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 2:28 PM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > >> Below, you can find the drafts of the test cases prepared on our Wiki for >> you to read and comment. Also, if you have some other audio use cases that >> yo

[Proposal] Test Cases for the Fedora Audio Test Day.

Hello friends of Fedora. As you know, Fedora 34 will have PipeWire as a default sound solution to replace PulseAudio. We would like to organize a Fedora Audio Test Day that will be aimed on the most common audio use on Fedora. It should help to prevent a situation when a problem will go unnoticed

Re: so.... how solid is the f34 branch at branch time?

Hi Matthew, I was trying to upgrade my testing machine with Fedora 33 to 34, however it did not work for me, because the repositories still seem to be out-of-sync. At least, this is what I am hoping for the reported broken upgrade paths. The 34 RPM-Fusion repos are not available either. Lukas O

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 7:54 AM Kamil Paral wrote: > On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 3:45 AM Robbi Nespu > wrote: > >> On Arch wiki mentioned "Firefox (84+) supports this method by default, >> while on Chromium (73+) one needs to enable WebRTC PipeWire support by >> setting the corresponding (experiment

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

ecord audio using the default web browser (if applicable) and gstreamer-based applications."* What do you think? On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 2:10 PM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > > >> >> I think there's a misunderstanding in how all the "frameworks" and &g

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

> > > I think there's a misunderstanding in how all the "frameworks" and stacked > on top of each other. I'm not very knowledgeable in this area, but I think > the layers are more or less like this: > > 6. Totem | Firefox | Rhythmbox | Audacity > -- > 5. GStreamer | FFmpeg >

Re: Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:16 AM Kamil Paral wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 7:35 PM Adam Williamson < > adamw...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > >> The reason the current criterion specifies "with gstreamer-based >> applications" is to avoid being too broad and vague. It really *means* >> "sound mu

Re: How To Test pipewire On F33?

When I swapped pulseaudio with pipewire, I did not use the *swap* argument, but installed pipewire over it: 1. dnf install pipewire pipewire-pulseaudio --allowerasing 2. reboot computer 3. try that pipewire is running: *pactl info *check that pulseaudio server runs (on Pipewire) I was

Re: How To Test pipewire On F33?

On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 5:54 PM Garry T. Williams wrote: > What is the procedure for testing pipewire on a F33 system? > I am currently working on several test cases for the qa process against pipewire, however I am mainly focusing on F34. If you have ideas how we could test it or what we could

Re: Testcase Audio Recording Basic (new test case proposal)

On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 11:15 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 5:21 PM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > >> The latest version of the proposal: >> >> Testcase Audio Recording (change proposal) Description >> >> This test case tests whether sound can be

Re: Testcase Audio Recording Basic (new test case proposal)

The latest version of the proposal: Testcase Audio Recording (change proposal) Description This test case tests whether sound can be recorded on Fedora. Prerequisites - Install any sound recording application you're familiar with. If you've never worked with any, you can try the *Gnome Sou

Re: [External] Re: Respins for OEM preloads

Today I performed the Desktop tests on the above mentioned respin and I believe there are no big flaws in it. Going through the usual testing stuff, I have not stumbled on anything. The combination Alt-N in the Intro still does not work, but since this was not blocking for F33, I consider this to b

Re: [External] Re: Respins for OEM preloads

> I'm currently downloading the ISO to test locally and see if I can > reproduce this sort of behaviour... > I could not reproduce it locally on this respin. > -- > Adam Williamson > Fedora QA > IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha > https://www.happyassassin.net > > > __

Re: Testcase Audio Recording Basic (new test case proposal)

> As an exercise, imagine the application is not called the GNOME Sound > Recorder, but a Fred's Sound Recorder instead. I don't think we'd be having > this conversation at all, in that case. > I have been testing the new respin of Workstation and must confirm that Audacity keeps crashing upon exi

Proposal to modify: Working Sound Beta Release Criterion

Hello friends of Fedora, I have been thinking about a proposal to modify the %subj. I have tried several version and I did not like any, so finally I am proposing this text: *Working sound* *The installed system must be able to play back and record audio.* This is a very short and general versi

Re: Introduction Amanda Cavalcante

> You can start to test updates in [http://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/] for > Fedora 32 and Fedora 33. > Update testing is where a tester tests a package and gives out a +1 > Karma for PASS and -1 Karma for FAIL. You can go to > bodhi.fedoraproject.org where you can sort the packages with Fedora > Rel

Re: Testcase Audio Recording Basic (new test case proposal)

On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 12:30 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 6:15 AM Kamil Paral wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 11:24 AM Lukas Ruzicka > wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 10:04 AM Lukas Ruzicka > wrote: &

Re: Testcase Audio Recording Basic (new test case proposal)

On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 10:04 AM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > Have you tested whether gnome-sound-recorder works well in KDE and >> optionally also other desktops? If not (or if it pulls too many >> dependencies), it would be good to suggest an alternative tool as well. >> >

Re: Testcase Audio Recording Basic (new test case proposal)

> > Have you tested whether gnome-sound-recorder works well in KDE and > optionally also other desktops? If not (or if it pulls too many > dependencies), it would be good to suggest an alternative tool as well. > No, I haven't tested it and I was thinking about finding an alternative for KDE. Than

Re: Fedora Audio Test Cases for Test Day (a proposal)

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 5:21 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 5:02 PM Brandon Nielsen > wrote: > >> Would some kind of device switching test case be feasible? In my >> experience that's where a lot of weird behavior creeps in. For example, >> plugging in a USB interface, using it,

Re: Proposal to Modify: Testcase dualboot with macOS

On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 8:56 PM Geoffrey Marr wrote: > > After reviewing our "dualboot with macOS" testcase [0], I noticed that the > testcase says it's based on a Mac running macOS 10.12 Sierra. At this point > in time, macOS Sierra is almost 5 years old. I would like to update this > testcase t

Fedora Audio Test Cases for Test Day (a proposal)

Hello friends of Fedora, the following is a proposal for the test scope of PipeWire audio in Fedora, which could be tested as part of Fedora Audio Test Days. Please let me know what you think about it. Particular test cases have not been developed yet, but as soon as I have the idea what is actual

Testcase Audio Recording Basic (new test case proposal)

Hello friends of Fedora, this is the follow up for my previous email which proposes a new test Desktop test case to cover basic sound recording, because we feel that we also should test some basic recording, especially in times when many people need to communicate via online tools. So far, recordi

Testcase Audio Basic - a change proposal

Hello friends of Fedora, with Fedora 34, the current audio server Pulseaudio will be (probably) replaced by PipeWire which will handle all system audio. Therefore we, at Fedora QA, believe that some adjustments should be made to how we test the basic audio. The following is a proposal to change th

Re: Proposal to adjust final criterion for backgrounds

> > The approach the current criteria were intended to back was one where > we would have something like rawhide-backgrounds or development- > backgrounds which contained a background image that was very obviously > a WORK IN PROGRESS kind of thing - picture of Beefy with "PRE RELEASE" > written on

Re: [Test-Announce] Taskotron is EOL today

Poor little chap. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64vo_9R8KEI&t=167s On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 10:00 AM Kamil Paral wrote: > As previously announced [1], Taskotron [2] will be shut down today. See > the announcement and its discussion for more details and some background > info. > > As a result,

Re: Suggest a new criterion for Suspend.

> The problem with this is how do you answer the question on which hardware? > Suspend is very hardware dependent and even to the point of what devices > are plugged into it could affect it's ability to suspend. So would that be > just a requirement for suspend work on a VM, or a particular set of

Suggest a new criterion for Suspend.

Hello friends, yesterday, during the Blocker Review Meeting we decided to suggest a blocking criterion for suspending the system, because it would clarify the situations where to accept a blocker like the one from yesterday https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1816621. Some of our team, me i

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 32 Rawhide 20200101.n.0 nightly compose nominated for testing

> Happy New Year, everyone! :D > Happy New Year to you, too. > -- > Adam Williamson > Fedora QA Community Monkey > IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net > http://www.happyassassin.net > ___ > test mailing list -- test

Re: For today's agenda item - Proposed disk unmount test case

I was hoping you would include `journalctl | grep` commands that would look > for the strings Chris mentioned, so that it's easy for people or for > scripts to confirm whether the filesystem was or wasn't properly unmounted. > It's still helpful to include the examples (they don't necessarily need

Re: Proposal: Asynchronous blocker review process (using Pagure)

> Abstain is useful if there are conflicts of interest, or to indicate no > preference either way, or as a result of confusion. I chock up more than > one abstain vote as an indicator the proposal isn't persuasive enough. > Indeed if everyone votes to abstain, that means the vote was premature/ill

Re: Proposal: Asynchronous blocker review process (using Pagure)

> >The VOTE must be only +1 or -1. Indecisive people do not need to put > that down, they just can do nothing. > > Haha. In defense of 0, there is a long history of "abstain" votes. There > may be a proposal that someone doesn't support, but also doesn't want to > stand in the way of progression, i

Fwd: Proposal: Asynchronous blocker review process (using Pagure)

I support the idea of an asynchronous blocker bug process. > Blocker Bugs App (DIY solution) > ** > > I am not sure how complicated that would be, but the blockerbug application could do the stuff and in the background it could have Bugzilla as a backed, so the Bugzilla process de

Re: Gnome on F31: X and Wayland clipboard weirdness(es)/regressions

> > > It would be of course up to debate. I'm just saying it's a good topic for > debate. > > Sure, I will buy popcorn and coke :D -- Lukáš Růžička FEDORA QE, RHCE Red Hat Purkyňova 115 612 45 Brno - Královo Pole lruzi...@redhat.com TRIED AND PERSONALLY TESTED, ER

Re: Gnome on F31: X and Wayland clipboard weirdness(es)/regressions

Both have been rejected as blockers due to being too "edge case". But > pasting into QT applications seems sufficiently broad to be considering as > blocking, I think. So if your problems are not related to those two issues > (e.g. have a VM running), please file new bugs and feel free to propose >

Re: Proposal: Toggle key criterion

Yeah, I think this criteria fully and plausibly describes the requirement. +1 Dne út 1. říj 2019 14:54 uživatel Kamil Paral napsal: > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 9:19 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > >> As we discussed in today's blocker review meeting[1], I am presenting >> a draft proposal for the toggle

Re: Gnome-calendar 3.34 bug reported

I already proposed it. Thanks. On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 1:50 PM Julen Landa Alustiza < jla...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > Can you propose it as final blocker? > > gnome-calendar is included on wks default install and has an icon on the > menu, so it must work > > On September 19, 2019 11:49:27 AM

Re: proposal: move "image size" criterion from Beta to Final

Cool :) On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 2:55 AM Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2019-09-18 at 08:29 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Tue, 2019-09-17 at 17:38 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 2:35 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > > > > > > I like this approach better than just movin

Re: Last minute blocker bugs

I am talking about the quorum, if there is a late discovered bug, that would normally be considered a blocker, but because a) it could not be fixed on time, and b) it is not as serious as it would prevent people from using Fedora anyway In this case, I think more people to decide is crucial becau

Re: Media writer

I agree. Media Writer as the main way they create install media; so it would be > handy to have it installed with the Anaconda install of Workstation. > Rather than installing Media Writer later on. > > -- Lukáš Růžička FEDORA QE, RHCE Red Hat Purkyňova 115 612 45 B

Re: Last minute blocker bugs

| 17 |=== == Blocker Review Meetings |=== | Date | Presence | 2/11/19 | 6 | 3/04/19 | 11 | 3/11/19 | 14 | 3/18/19 | 9 | 3/25/19 | 13 | 4/1/19 | 10 | 4/8/19 | 15 | 4/15/19 | 14 | 4/22/19 | 13 | Average | 11 |=== On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 12:21 PM Julen Landa Alustiza wrote: > Lukas Ruzicka igorleak ha

Re: Last minute blocker bugs

I have suggested the quorum, but we can still discuss the exact numbers (mine were just examples). Besides, the votes do not have to come from people present in one particular IRC meeting, but - votes could be recorded in all such meetings (blocker bugs meeting, go-nogo, ...) - votes coul

  1   2   >