On 05/02/2013 01:10 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 17:01 +0200, Phil Knirsch wrote:
Hi guys.
I'd like to open up the discussion about getting multipath testing as a
(optional) criteria for RC.
I understand that the typical Fedora user most likely will never
encounter or use multipath, but as we do have server users for Fedora
there might be some merit to it.
We've ran into this on the ppc64 side the last few releases where we did
test this during our alpha, beta and rc checks and worked with the
respective maintainers to fix the issues we found.
So if there is an interest to make this a general test case we'd
certainly be able to provide a QE template with all the necessary steps.
And as mentioned, even if it's not going to be a blocking criteria maybe
having it as included as an optional test case might still be worth it.
Let me know what you guys think.
So a couple of things: there's the test cases and the criteria. The test
cases enforce the criteria, the criteria back the test cases.
Understood. :)
So there's no such thing as 'optional criteria' - the criteria are
always mandatory =) We do have 'optional test cases', though: these are
test cases that don't enforce any particular criterion and hence don't
have to pass, but that it seems like a good idea to test. Those are the
things listed as 'Optional' at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Fedora_19_Install_Results_Template .
Excellent, thats what i was looking for, thanks!
I don't think there'd be any objections at all to adding an optional
test case for multipath, certainly. So that would be the first thing to
do, and if you want to go ahead and contribute one, that would be
awesome. Really, all you need to do is go ahead and write the test case,
edit it into
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Fedora_19_Install_Results_Template in
the appropriate spot (probably with the other 'optional' tests, at the
bottom), and let the list know you've done it - we can review it.
Cool, great. Once i have all the info to define the test template i'll
work with Tommy on creating that.
Adding a release criterion is a more significant action and that
requires discussion / consensus for sure. I'm not sure if we want to
block a Fedora release on multipath functionality, but I don't really
have a lot of data for that, it's just a feeling. Does anyone have good
arguments for/against covering multipath in the criteria? Johann has a
good point about hardware availability; it should usually be the case
that the QA folks who work for Red Hat should be able to get access to
multipath hardware for testing one way or another, but that may not be
enough for us to feel comfortable.
If we did decide to cover multipath functionality in the criteria, all
we'd have to do to the test case is change it from 'Optional' to 'Final'
in the template at that point. No problem at all. So definitely the
first step is just to write the test case and add that in.
100% agree. I didn't want to come across as "we must have this as a
criteria for releases!!11!!" as i clearly understand that the
availability of required hardware in Fedora is rather limited and that
the typical use case for Fedora users is most likely not going to
include multipath.
So we'll be working on defining the test case, add it as an optional
test template. And as you said, the decision whether this should be a
blocking criteria for releases is a separate from that and a first step
in the test case anyway.
Thanks!
Regards, Phil
--
Philipp Knirsch | Tel.: +49-711-96437-470
Manager Core Services | Fax.: +49-711-96437-111
Red Hat GmbH | Email: Phil Knirsch <pknirsch@xxxxxxxxxx>
Wankelstrasse 5 | Web: http://www.redhat.com/
D-70563 Stuttgart, Germany
--
test mailing list
test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
