Fedora Rawhide-20170724.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Workstation live i386 Server boot i386 Kde live i386 Failed openQA tests: 16/137 (x86_64), 3/18 (i386), 1/2 (arm) New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20170723.n.0): ID: 123796 Test: x86_64 universal install_simple_encrypted URL:

Fedora 25 updates-testing report

The following Fedora 25 Security updates need testing: Age URL 209 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-d79ba708cb exim-4.87.1-1.fc25 108 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-e2d17af41e python-XStatic-jquery-ui-1.12.0.1-4.fc25 47

Fedora 24 updates-testing report

The following Fedora 24 Security updates need testing: Age URL 216 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-26f9817b08 squid-3.5.23-1.fc24 209 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-eaaa9c4a08 exim-4.87.1-1.fc24 172

Re: Blocker bug process proposal: waiving late-discovered blockers to next release

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:02:09AM +0200, Kamil Paral wrote: > > But all of that above is a separate problem. What I'd like to understand > is > > why you think existing bugs should be treated differently from new

Re: Blocker bug process proposal: waiving late-discovered blockers to next release

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 11:03:34AM +0200, Kamil Paral wrote: > However, I think I misread your comment. I believed you're proposing we > reject bugs existing in stable releases as blockers at any point of the > development cycle. But you seem to have suggested we do this only if > they're

[Call For Action] Fedora QA Onboading call Poll

Hey All, First of all , I would like to thank all those who have shown interest in testing Fedora and making it better. We saw a lot of new faces in the test day(s) and introduction emails to welcome you all, here's is what we have for you. We are going to have an onboarding call, We will