Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: So called "cadence testing" is a failure

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Beans
    11,601

    So called "cadence testing" is a failure

    Look at the standing bugs for just Lubuntu:

    Lubuntu_2013-03-23 18:21:53.jpg

    And the final Beta dates don't even match between "cadence" and the release schedule:

    https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/Cadence/Raring

    https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RaringRingtail/ReleaseSchedule

    We've been dealing with the same live installer breakage since mid November:

    https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...y/+bug/1080701

    And now we have a 'network-manager' bug that effects both Ubuntu and Lubuntu for several days!

    https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...r/+bug/1159201

    And the source bug is locked as private

    I'm sure the Captain still thinks he's steering the ship but the rudder is totally detached

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Beans
    1

    Re: So called "cadence testing" is an utter failure!

    While i don't like the idea of candence testing either, you've went too far.
    first, the bug list you had shows all bugs found in raring reported on the iso-tracker. for all *buntu's
    second, the freeze bug has been found and confirmed (making it no longer a problem caused by bad testing), but is very difficult to fix, if it's "our fault", please, show us how we could have fixed it.
    third, the network manager bug is private because it shows private info of some form.
    third, i'm shocked that you overlooked the areas even worse, like testdrive, the PPC recursive bug, and the lack of testing for netboot and ppc.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Beans
    11,601

    Re: So called "cadence testing" is an utter failure!

    Quote Originally Posted by Noskcaj10 View Post
    While i don't like the idea of candence testing either, you've went too far.
    first, the bug list you had shows all bugs found in raring reported on the iso-tracker. for all *buntu's
    second, the freeze bug has been found and confirmed (making it no longer a problem caused by bad testing), but is very difficult to fix, if it's "our fault", please, show us how we could have fixed it.
    third, the network manager bug is private because it shows private info of some form.
    third, i'm shocked that you overlooked the areas even worse, like testdrive, the PPC recursive bug, and the lack of testing for netboot and ppc.
    You're right, it's per testcase rather than per flavor.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Beans
    11,601

    Re: So called "cadence testing" is an utter failure!

    Quote Originally Posted by Noskcaj10 View Post
    While i don't like the idea of candence testing either, you've went too far.
    first, the bug list you had shows all bugs found in raring reported on the iso-tracker. for all *buntu's
    second, the freeze bug has been found and confirmed (making it no longer a problem caused by bad testing), but is very difficult to fix, if it's "our fault", please, show us how we could have fixed it.
    third, the network manager bug is private because it shows private info of some form.
    third, i'm shocked that you overlooked the areas even worse, like testdrive, the PPC recursive bug, and the lack of testing for netboot and ppc.
    I made a suggestion to narrow down the cause a long time ago:

    https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...01/comments/48


    Super dumb question :^)

    Is there a way to temporarily revert these partman changes on the live image:

    ubiquity (2.13.2) raring; urgency=low

    * Try to copy signed kernel from vmlinuz.efi in preference to
    vmlinuz.efi.signed; vmlinuz.efi is friendlier to archaic 8.3 file name
    restrictions which apply to isolinux.
    * Automatic update of included source packages: partman-auto 105ubuntu1,
    partman-auto-lvm 46ubuntu1, partman-crypto 55ubuntu1, partman-lvm
    82ubuntu1.

    -- Colin Watson <cjwatson@ubuntu.com> Mon, 12 Nov 2012 15:11:08 +0000

    I'm asking because I archive some testing discs and as best I can tell that's about when things broke. I'm thinking a temporary reversion would be acceptable just for testing purposes since we're not doing alphas in Raring.

    Sorry to be a pain in the neck.
    Of course it's now far too late to think about that because we've been building on top of an unstable foundation for 4 months

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Beans
    11,601

    Re: So called "cadence testing" is an utter failure!

    Quote Originally Posted by Noskcaj10 View Post
    While i don't like the idea of candence testing either, you've went too far.
    first, the bug list you had shows all bugs found in raring reported on the iso-tracker. for all *buntu's
    second, the freeze bug has been found and confirmed (making it no longer a problem caused by bad testing), but is very difficult to fix, if it's "our fault", please, show us how we could have fixed it.
    third, the network manager bug is private because it shows private info of some form.
    third, i'm shocked that you overlooked the areas even worse, like testdrive, the PPC recursive bug, and the lack of testing for netboot and ppc.
    Eerm, maybe. I've reported bugs with loads of personal info and I was asked whether or not to allow that info to be posted while actually using "apport". But if a bug is reported using "http://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/PACKAGENAME/+filebug?no-redirect" the bug is frequently marked private with no outstanding warning.

    In fact I need to check one against the netboot mini.iso right now

    Edit: One more thing, maybe the bug-bot could be reprogrammed to never mark a bug report as a duplicate of a private report. Maybe it could just add a note to the private report about potential dupes.
    Last edited by kansasnoob; March 29th, 2013 at 04:36 PM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Beans
    11,601

    Re: So called "cadence testing" is an utter failure!

    Quote Originally Posted by Noskcaj10 View Post
    While i don't like the idea of candence testing either, you've went too far.
    first, the bug list you had shows all bugs found in raring reported on the iso-tracker. for all *buntu's
    second, the freeze bug has been found and confirmed (making it no longer a problem caused by bad testing), but is very difficult to fix, if it's "our fault", please, show us how we could have fixed it.
    third, the network manager bug is private because it shows private info of some form.
    third, i'm shocked that you overlooked the areas even worse, like testdrive, the PPC recursive bug, and the lack of testing for netboot and ppc.
    I recently used testdrive w/virtualbox and noticed no problems different than those I'd encountered on bare metal. I have no hardware to test PPC. I did just run a test on the latest netboot mini.iso that failed:

    https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...r/+bug/1161898

    I'm doing my job as a tester. I report bugs and I follow up on my bugs. And I don't create a new forum user ID to flame someone that tries to point out an obvious problem with the current testing scenario.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Beans
    9,205
    Distro
    Ubuntu Budgie 17.10 Artful Aardvark

    Re: So called "cadence testing" is an utter failure!

    Quote Originally Posted by kansasnoob View Post
    I recently used testdrive w/virtualbox and noticed no problems different than those I'd encountered on bare metal. I have no hardware to test PPC. I did just run a test on the latest netboot mini.iso that failed:

    https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...r/+bug/1161898

    I'm doing my job as a tester. I report bugs and I follow up on my bugs. And I don't create a new forum user ID to flame someone that tries to point out an obvious problem with the current testing scenario.

    Most of us know you are one of the best beta-testers @ ubuntu-forums. When we point things out about programs that are buggy or a process that just does not work, we are going to raise hair up on devlopers backs. Thats part of being a good beta-tester.

    regards,
    ventrical

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Beans
    530
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: So called "cadence testing" is a failure

    Quote Originally Posted by kansasnoob View Post
    I'm sure the Captain still thinks he's steering the ship but the rudder is totally detached
    +1
    I couldn't have said it better myself.
    I hope we don't have a shipwreck

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Beans
    4,405
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: So called "cadence testing" is a failure

    When I think of the bugs that have persisted or constantly recurred over the many cycles that I have been doing Ubuntu testing it saddens me that we seem to be beating our heads against a stone wall .
    if it ain't broke you haven't tweaked it enough

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Beans
    699

    Re: So called "cadence testing" is a failure

    Not in general but i sometimes do see trouble spots where things change drastically between release. For example bluetooth support

    http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2121960

    I did think fixing bugs and making it work in Ubuntu 12.04 should stick for some time but i was wrong. But this are small things in general i am pleased and most things always work as i expect them to.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •