Welcome Fedora Quality Planet

Hello, I’d like to introduce a new sub-planet of Fedora Planet to you, located at http://fedoraplanet.org/quality/ (you don’t need to remember the URL, there’s a sub-planet picker in the top right corner of Fedora Planet pages that allows you to switch between sub-planets).

Fedora Quality Planet will contain news and useful information about QA tools and processes present in Fedora, updates on our quality automation efforts, guides for package maintainers (and other teams) how to interact with our tools and checks or understand the reported failures, announcements about critical issues in Fedora releases, and more.

Our goal is to have a single place for you to visit (or subscribe to) and get a good overview of what’s happening in the Fedora Quality space. Of course all Fedora Quality posts should also show up in the main Fedora Planet feed, so if you’re already subscribed to that, you shouldn’t miss our posts either.

If you want to join our effort and publish some interesting quality-related posts into Fedora Quality Planet, you’re more then welcome! Please see the instructions how to syndicate your blog. If you have any questions or need help, ask in the test mailing list or ping kparal or adamw on #fedora-qa freenode IRC channel. Thanks!

Welcome Fedora Quality Planet

‘Package XXX is not signed’ error during upgrade to Fedora 24

Many people hit issues like this when trying to upgrade to Fedora 24:

 Error: Package a52dec-0.7.4-19.fc24.x86_64.rpm is not signed

You can easily see that this is a very widespread issue if you look at comments section under our upgrade guide on fedora magazine. In fact, this issue probably affects everyone who has rpmfusion repository enabled (which is a very popular third-party repository). Usually the a52dec package is mentioned, because it’s early in the alphabet listing, but it can be a different one (depending on what you installed from rpmfusion).

The core issue is that even though their Fedora 24 repository is available, the packages in it are not signed yet – they simply did not have time to do that yet. However, rpmfusion repository metadata from Fedora 23 demand that all packages are signed (which is a good thing, package signing is crucial to prevent all kinds of nasty security attacks). The outcome is that DNF rejects the transaction for being unsecure.

According to rpmfusion maintainers, they are working on signing their repositories and it should be done hopefully soon. So if you’re not in a hurry with your upgrade, just wait a while and the problem will disappear soon (hopefully).

But, if you insist that you want to upgrade now, what are your options?

Some people suggest you can add --nogpgcheck option to the command line. Please don’t do that! That completely bypasses any security checks, even for proper Fedora packages! It will get you vulnerable to security attacks.

A much better option is to temporarily remove rpmfusion repositories:

$ sudo dnf remove 'rpmfusion-*-release'

and run the upgrade command again. You’ll likely need to add --allowerasing option, because it will probably want to remove some packages that you installed from rpmfusion (like vlc):

$ sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=24 --allowerasing

This is OK, after you upgrade your system, you can enable rpmfusion repositories again, and install the packages that were removed prior to upgrade.

(I recommend to really remove rpmfusion repositories and not just disable them, because they manage their repos in a non-standard way, enabling and disabling their updates and updates-testing repos during the system lifecycle according to their needs, so it’s hard to know which repos to enable after the system upgrade – they are not the same as were enabled before the system upgrade. What they are doing is really rather ugly and it’s much better to perform a clean installation of their repos.)

After the system upgrade finishes, simply visit their website, install the repos again, and install any packages that you’re missing. This way, your upgrade was performed in a safe way. The packages installed from rpmfusion might still be installed unsafely (depending whether they manage to sign the repo by that time or not), but it’s much better than to upgrade your whole system unsafely.

To close this up, I’m sorry that people are hit by these complications, but it’s not something Fedora project can directly influence (except for banning third-party repos during system upgrades completely, or some similar drastic measure). This is in hands of those third-party repos. Hopefully lots of this pain will go away once we start using Flatpak.

‘Package XXX is not signed’ error during upgrade to Fedora 24

KVM disk performance: raw vs qcow2 format

Some time ago I compared disk drivers performance in KVM. Today I compared different storage formats – raw and qcow2. Let’s have a look:

Test procedure: Create an empty 10 GB image, attach to VM using VirtIO driver, boot F20 Alpha Live x86_64, measure the time of installation. Repeat installation once again, this time reusing the existing image (instead of creating a new one). Do this for both formats.

Test results:

raw 1st pass          2:36
raw 2nd pass          2:38
qcow2 1st pass        2:36
qcow2 2nd pass        2:44

As you can see, the results are very much the same. It seems it doesn’t matter much which format you use.

But, qcow2 format has some nice additional features, like copy-on-write cloning. If I need to test something very quickly in my existing VM and then revert the changes back, this is the easiest way:

$ cd /var/lib/libvirt/images
$ mv f19.qcow2 f19.qcow2_orig
$ qemu-img create -f qcow2 -b f19.qcow2_orig f19.qcow2
Formatting 'f19.qcow2', fmt=qcow2 size=10737418240 backing_file='f19.qcow2_orig' encryption=off cluster_size=65536 lazy_refcounts=off
$ # Run the VM now and do your tasks
$ mv f19.qcow2_orig f19.qcow2

Enjoy.

Flattr this

KVM disk performance: raw vs qcow2 format

Experiment with bleeding-edge GNOME using GnomeOSTree

I have just discovered GnomeOSTree (I’ve heard about it before, but never tried it). It allows you to run an absolutely fresh version of GNOME (checked out from git the very day) in a virtual machine. This is perfect for

  • experimenting with new features
  • checking whether a bug still exists in the development version
  • checking whether a bug fix is correct, without waiting for a distribution package update

I’ve just played with it for 10 minutes, so I might be missing a lot of things, but this seems to be a very useful tool for anyone testing and reporting GNOME bugs. It’s extremely easy to set up, you just download a VM disk image and import it into virt-manager. Later you can update it from inside the system. Try it!

ostree

Flattr this

Experiment with bleeding-edge GNOME using GnomeOSTree

The heroes of Fedora updates testing in Q2 2013

1360095720_PrizeAnother quarter is gone, let’s see how much testing of proposed updates in Fedora we have done. The purpose of this testing is to make sure that broken updates don’t enter our stable (or soon-to-be-stable) Fedora releases. The test feedback is managed inside Bodhi application and here are the statistics for the recent quarter:

Test period: Q2 2013 (2013-04-01 – 2013-06-30)
Testers: 669
Comments1: 3891

Name Updates commented
Adam Williamson (adamwill) 231
Reindl Harald (hreindl) 224
Igor Gnatenko (ignatenkobrain) 224
T.C. Hollingsworth (patches) 174
Kevin Fenzi (kevin) 169
Robert C. Lightfoot (boblfoot) 125
misc 124
Kalev Lember (kalev) 111
Alexander Kurtakov (akurtakov) 107
Piotr Drąg (raven) 106
nonamedotc 102
bitlord 99
Ankur Sinha (ankursinha) 72
Kamil Páral (kparal) 69
quickbooks 65
Daniel Dimitrov (dandim) 63
Matthias Runge (mrunge) 46
Michael Schwendt (mschwendt) 39
mharmsen 32
keramidas 30
Peter Robinson (pbrobinson) 26
Rex Dieter (rdieter) 26
bojan 26
Wolfgang Ulbrich (raveit65) 25
Dan Mashal (vicodan) 23
Jack Magne (jmagne) 18
Nick Bebout (nb) 18
gwei3 17
Orion Poplawski (orion) 16
bradw 16
Adam Domurad (adomurad) 16
Matthias Clasen (mclasen) 16
nucleo 16
Endi Sukma Dewata (edewata) 15
Michael Catanzaro (catanzaro) 14
Arthur Scott Poore (spoore) 13
Sérgio Monteiro Basto (sergiomb) 13
Joel Burleson-Davis (sysengbd) 12
Tao Wu (wutao85) 12
Tom Callaway (spot) 12
Adam Jackson (ajax) 12
Abhishek Koneru (kaskahn) 12
Jens Petersen (petersen) 11
Joachim Backes (backes) 11
Ed Greshko (egreshko) 11
Heiko Adams (heikoada) 11
Dan Horák (sharkcz) 11
Freddy Willemsen (freddyw) 11
Christian Lockley (clockley1) 10
Samuel Sieb (ssieb) 10
robatino 10
amessina 10
Mamoru Tasaka (mtasaka) 10
Fabian Deutsch (fabiand) 10
Vojtech Bocek (tassadar) 9
Hans Müller (cairo) 9
Fabio Valentini (fafatheone) 9
Pete Walter (pwalter) 8
mooninite 8
leigh123linux 8
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbyszek) 7
Oron Peled (oron) 7
Peter Borsa (asrob) 7
Christopher Meng (cicku) 7
Tim Flink (tflink) 7
rcritten 7
Omair Majid (omajid) 7
Dean Hunter (deanhunter) 7
jerboaa 7
Mike FABIAN (mfabian) 7
Cristian Ciupitu (ciupicri) 7
Dennis Gilmore (ausil) 6
Martin Krizek (mkrizek) 6
Mikolaj Izdebski (mizdebsk) 6
Artyom (artkun) 6
Bruno Wolff III (bruno) 6
Simone Caronni (slaanesh) 6
Pavel Tisnovsky (ptisnovs) 6
Patrick Uiterwijk (puiterwijk) 6
Remi Collet (remi) 6
John Reiser (jreiser) 6
David Juran (djuran) 6
D. Charles Pyle (dcharlespyle) 6
pnemade 6
Josef Stribny (jstribny) 5
nixfas 5
Morten Stevens (mstevens) 5
Lijun Li (lijli) 5
Andrew Azores (aazores) 5
Kevin Kofler (kkofler) 5
avij 5
Axilleas Pipinellis (axilleas) 5
Ville Skyttä (scop) 5
Luke Macken (lmacken) 5
Chris Murphy (chrismurphy) 5
Johan Hedin (jhn) 5
Chad Feller (cfeller) 5
Nils Philippsen (nphilipp) 5
Germano Massullo (germano) 5
Elad Alfassa (elad) 5
David A. Marlin (dmarlin) 5
Martin Kosek (mkosek) 5
Dominic Hopf (dmaphy) 5
Karsten Hopp (karsten) 5
Šimon Lukašík (isimluk) 5
Tim Waugh (twaugh) 5
Vít Ondruch (vondruch) 5
tomspur 5
Samuel Greenfeld (greenfeld) 5
…and also 560 other reporters who created less than 5 reports each, but 848 reports combined!

1 If a person provides multiple comments to a single update, it is considered as a single comment. Karma value is not taken into account.

When compared to Q1 2013, the number of reporters remained steady, but the number of reports increased almost twofold. That is amazing, I suspect it’s directly related to the Fedora 19 stabilization cycle and release.

The top-performers have almost an even score, which is great to see. They are Adam Williamson (adamwill), Reindl Harald (hreindl) and Igor Gnatenko (ignatenkobrain). Thank you guys for your outstanding and steadfast performance!

It’s also interesting to see that in the top 15 list there are only 4 Red Hatters (Adam, Kevin, Alexander and me), all the rest are community participants. I love that fact very much. Testing might not always be fully engaging, but still, paid employees are the minority here. What a strong community.

If you see yourself in the table, or if you are somewhere below the threshold, thank you. Your effort makes Fedora stable and reliable.

If you haven’t participated yet, maybe it’s time to give it a try? You can start today! Just read QA:Updates_Testing and ask any questions in #fedora-qa on IRC or test list. We would love to see even more people involved.

Thanks everyone.


When reading the statistics, please take it with a grain of salt. Not all numbers are directly comparable. This is not meant to be a comparison chart, but a well-meant “thank you” letter.
The statistics were generated by these scripts.

The heroes of Fedora updates testing in Q2 2013

The heroes of Fedora 19 Final testing

1360095720_PrizeFedora 19 the Schrödinger’s Cat is out of the box, and alive! I have again gathered some interesting statistics about QA contributions, this time during the Final phase (between Beta and Final release).

Fedora 19 Final – wiki matrices

This is the list of people who filled in our release validation wiki matrices (Install, Desktop and Base), which are posted for every test compose (and release candidate) that we create. The purpose is to see which areas have been thoroughly tested and which were not.

Test period: Fedora 19 Beta – Fedora 19 Final
Testers: 29
Reports: 1035
Unique referenced bugs: 58

Name Reports submitted Referenced bugs1
robatino 259 929177 946964 958426 958427 972025 972046 974050 974052 975227 975230 975324 975325 976280 976281 977669 977671 977715 977732 978114 978124 978125 979171 979172 (23)
nonamedotc 127 972225 977879 (2)
adamwill 103 858270 892178 975800 978008 (4)
kparal 103 973068 974032 974038 977715 977816 977962 (6)
Wutao85 55
lbrabec 49 855824 858270 977962 978298 (4)
jpospisi 48 964586 975483 (2)
eischmann 39
lnie 24
pkotvan 23 969684 975813 (2)
jskladan 21
tflink 21 975495 (1)
mkrizek 21 977962 (1)
jsedlak 19 973747 975375 978346 (3)
pschindl 18
lnovy 16 743281 858270 (2)
mmarhefk 16 892178 959796 975521 (3)
Martix 15 976417 (1)
boblfoot 12 971191 (1)
jreiser 12 976582 (1)
kevin 10
satellit 10
werkman 5 971109 971255 976034 (3)
todoleza 3 970988 (1)
konradr 2 977974 977987 978036 (3)
mattdm 1
jreznik 1 705086 (1)
mooninite 1
dgilmore 1

1 This is a list of bug reports linked to the wiki results. They don’t have to be reported by that concrete person.

Who would have thought… Andre Robatino (robatino) is at the top again. It’s also very nice to see how many bugs he referenced during his testing. The more referenced bugs the more publicity, the more likeliness that someone reproduces them, the more likeliness someone fixes them. Thanks, Andre!

The community participation list continues with nonamedotc, who provided an amazing number of test case results as well. Then there is a long list of Red Hatters, the highest score split between Adam Williamson (adamwill) and Kamil Páral (kparal) (a.k.a. me). Since I referenced more bugs, I consider myself a winner 😛 “I only believe in statistics that I doctored myself.” 🙂

The community participation continues with Bob Lightfoot (boblfoot), who had been greatly active during Beta, John Reiser (jreiser), Thomas Gilliard (satellit) and others. Thank you, everyone.

Fedora 19 Final – Bugzilla

This is a trimmed list of people who reported bugs into Bugzilla against Fedora 19 in the specified time period. When compared to Fedora 19 Beta, the numbers went up again, especially the number of reporters. That’s really great.

Test period: Fedora 19 Beta – Fedora 19 Final (2013-05-29 – 2013-06-28)
Reporters: 614
New reports: 1486

Name Reports submitted1 Excess reports2 Accepted blockers3
IBM Bug Proxy 31 2 (6%) 0
Mark Salter 31 2 (6%) 0
Adam Williamson 27 1 (3%) 2
quickbooks.office at gmail.com 27 1 (3%) 1
Mikhail 26 1 (3%) 0
David Woodhouse 23 0 (0%) 0
Kamil Páral 22 2 (9%) 4
Andre Robatino 21 18 (85%) 1
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 17 0 (0%) 0
Dan Mashal 16 4 (25%) 0
Karel Volný 16 0 (0%) 0
Vojtěch Boček 13 0 (0%) 2
Emmanuel Pacaud 13 0 (0%) 0
Marian 12 3 (25%) 0
Jan Sedlák 11 0 (0%) 0
Lukas Brabec 11 1 (9%) 0
Martin Holec 11 2 (18%) 0
Tim Waugh 11 0 (0%) 0
A.J. Werkman 10 0 (0%) 0
Florian Weimer 10 0 (0%) 0
Heiko Adams 10 0 (0%) 0
Joachim Backes 10 3 (30%) 0
Chris Murphy 9 0 (0%) 1
Bojan Smojver 9 0 (0%) 0
Diogo Campos 9 0 (0%) 0
Jonas Thiem 9 0 (0%) 0
David Jaša 8 1 (12%) 0
Dean Hunter 8 1 (12%) 0
Endi Sukma Dewata 8 2 (25%) 0
James 8 2 (25%) 0
Jeff Bastian 7 1 (14%) 1
Jiří Martínek 7 1 (14%) 0
Marcus Moeller 7 3 (42%) 0
Matthew Miller 7 0 (0%) 0
Simon Lewis 7 1 (14%) 0
TKS 7 1 (14%) 0
Mark Hamzy 6 0 (0%) 1
Nix\ 6 2 (33%) 1
arnav 6 2 (33%) 0
Kalev Lember 6 1 (16%) 0
Krzysztof Daniel 6 0 (0%) 0
Rolle 6 1 (16%) 0
Russ Anderson 6 1 (16%) 0
Siddhesh Poyarekar 6 0 (0%) 0
James Heather 5 0 (0%) 1
Jiri Eischmann 5 1 (20%) 1
Michael Scherer 5 0 (0%) 1
Alexey Derlaft 5 2 (40%) 0
Andrea Oliveri 5 1 (20%) 0
Björn Esser 5 0 (0%) 0
D. Charles Pyle 5 0 (0%) 0
Dennis Gilmore 5 0 (0%) 0
Edgar Hoch 5 0 (0%) 0
Flóki Pálsson 5 1 (20%) 0
Francisco de la Peña 5 1 (20%) 0
Joshua Holm 5 0 (0%) 0
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk 5 0 (0%) 0
Lukas -krtek.net- Novy 5 2 (40%) 0
mark 5 0 (0%) 0
Matthias Clasen 5 0 (0%) 0
nonamedotc at gmail.com 5 2 (40%) 0
Parag 5 2 (40%) 0
Paul Whalen 5 0 (0%) 0
Reartes Guillermo 5 0 (0%) 0
Vít Ondruch 5 0 (0%) 0
Álvaro Castillo 5 0 (0%) 0
Štefan Gurský 5 0 (0%) 0
…and also 547 other reporters who created less than 5 reports each, but 834 reports combined!

1 The total number of new reports (including “excess reports”). Reopened reports or reports with a changed version are not included, because it was not technically easy to retrieve those. This is one of the reasons why you shouldn’t take the numbers too seriously, but just as interesting and fun data.
2 Excess reports are those that were closed as NOTABUG, WONTFIX, WORKSFORME, CANTFIX or INSUFFICIENT_DATA. Excess reports are not necessarily a bad thing, but they make for interesting statistics. Close manual inspection is required to separate valuable excess reports from those which are less valuable.
3 This only includes reports that were created by that particular user and accepted as blockers afterwards. The user might have proposed other people’s reports as blockers, but this is not reflected in this number.

The top reporters are nicely and evenly distributed, there are no extreme performers as in the wiki statistics. The top position share IBM Bug Proxy and Mark Salter. Mark reported a number of build failures for ARM architecture. I assume IBM Bug Proxy is probably a shared account among IBM employees who care about Fedora development – they reported a number of anaconda, kernel and boot issues. It’s always nice to see other companies involved in raising the Fedora quality – welcome, IBM 🙂

When it comes to general bug reporting, the top Red Hatter is Adam Williamson. As for the community, quickbooks.office reported the same number of bugs, most of them being SELinux error duplicates. Mikhail closely follows with a much more interesting mix of bug reports, which also applies for David Woodhouse. The community list follows with Andre Robatino (mostly fake bug reports for test purposes), Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek, Dan Mashal and others.

It’s great to see so many bug reports and so even distribution of the top reporters. Thanks, all of you.

Fedora 19 Beta – updates testing

This is a trimmed list of people who provided feedback in Bodhi for all updates proposed into Fedora 19 in the specified time period. The purpose is to make sure that broken updates do not enter the stable repository and the release continuously stabilizes. The number of testers increased considerably again as compared to Beta.

Test period: Fedora 19 Beta – Fedora 19 Final (2013-05-29 – 2013-06-28)
Testers: 240
Comments1: 1107

Name Updates commented
Igor Gnatenko (ignatenkobrain) 155
Adam Williamson (adamwill) 76
nonamedotc 71
Kalev Lember (kalev) 57
Alexander Kurtakov (akurtakov) 47
bitlord 45
T.C. Hollingsworth (patches) 41
quickbooks 35
Piotr Drąg (raven) 29
Kevin Fenzi (kevin) 28
Ankur Sinha (ankursinha) 20
keramidas 20
misc 20
Michael Schwendt (mschwendt) 16
Peter Robinson (pbrobinson) 15
Wolfgang Ulbrich (raveit65) 13
Dan Mashal (vicodan) 13
Matthias Clasen (mclasen) 12
Matthias Runge (mrunge) 11
bojan 10
Kamil Páral (kparal) 9
leigh123linux 8
D. Charles Pyle (dcharlespyle) 6
Pete Walter (pwalter) 6
Joachim Backes (backes) 6
mharmsen 6
Rex Dieter (rdieter) 5
Dennis Gilmore (ausil) 5
Ed Greshko (egreshko) 5
Dominic Hopf (dmaphy) 5
Endi Sukma Dewata (edewata) 5
Abhishek Koneru (kaskahn) 5
Kai Engert (kengert) 4
Jiri Eischmann (eischmann) 4
pnemade 4
Martin Kho (mkho) 4
Vojtech Bocek (tassadar) 4
Reindl Harald (hreindl) 4
Heiko Adams (heikoada) 4
Ian Malone (imalone) 3
Lukas Brabec (lbrabec) 3
Anton Arapov (aarapov) 3
Dan Horák (sharkcz) 3
Ray Strode (rstrode) 3
Hans Müller (cairo) 3
Greg Schlau (gregschlau) 3
Sérgio Monteiro Basto (sergiomb) 3
Nathan Kinder (nkinder) 3
gil 3
Martin Kosek (mkosek) 3
Artyom (artkun) 3
Roland Grunberg (rgrunber) 3
…and also 188 other reporters who created less than 3 reports each, but 235 reports combined!

1 If a person provides multiple comments to a single update, it is considered as a single comment. Karma value is not taken into account.

A new star has emerged, Igor Gnatenko (ignatenkobrain) completely dominated here. Great job, Igor! The top performing Red Hatter was, yet again, Adam Williamson (adamwill).

The top community list, apart from Igor, also contains nonamedotc, Kalev Lember (kalev), bitlord, T.C. Hollingsworth (patches), quickbooks, Piotr Drąg (raven), and others. It’s great to see so many people involved, because testing proposed updates and providing karma is one of the easiest way to contribute, yet extremely important at the same time. Thanks to anyone who contributed!

Summary

For most parts, the number of reports stays similar to Beta, but the number of people involved rose considerably. Beta release seems to be very attractive to the Fedora community and rightly so, it’s the last step before everything is pronounced stable. We’re glad to see so many people involved in release testing and we hope that we will see you again in Fedora 20 cycle!

In the meantime you can help as well – for example testing the proposed updates for stable Fedora releases is as useful, maybe even more important, than for releases in development. You can also play with Rawhide and help us find the bugs well in advance. There is a lot of possibilities – if it sounds interesting to you, be sure to have a look at QA/Join, follow the announcements and talk to us in #fedora-qa on IRC and test list. Your involvement will help not only Fedora and its users, but the whole Linux ecosystem. Thanks!


When reading the statistics, please take it with a grain of salt. The numbers are not directly comparable. People might see some reports as more valuable than others. Some people tested a lot of components, but haven’t found many problems (but that also helps). Some people used their skills in other areas than those mentioned. This is not meant to be a comparison chart, but a well-meant “thank you” letter.
The statistics were generated by these scripts.

The heroes of Fedora 19 Final testing

The heroes of Fedora 19 Beta testing

1360095720_PrizeFedora 19 Beta was released last week. As usual, here are some interesting statistics from different areas of our testing efforts. No matter how large your contribution was, if you’ve helped us, thank you.

Fedora 19 Beta – wiki matrices

This is the list of people who filled in our release validation wiki matrices (Install, Desktop and Base), which are posted for every test compose (and release candidate) that we create. The purpose is to see which areas have been thoroughly tested and which were not.

Test period: Fedora 19 Alpha – Fedora 19 Beta
Testers: 27
Reports: 837
Unique referenced bugs: 63

Name Reports submitted Referenced bugs1
boblfoot 222 950487 951951 959605 959719 959793 959796 960837 962248 962569 963503 964586 965213 (12)
robatino 195 929177 946964 958424 958426 958427 958430 958436 959610 963547 964069 (10)
tassadar 72 920549 962039 962092 962701 965101 965663 965940 965974 966086 966095 966894 (11)
nonamedotc 71 951951 958436 958512 959796 (4)
adamwill 41 858270 950022 964352 966424 966598 (5)
Wutao85 40 963503 (1)
kparal 35 810112 892178 922885 950022 951951 (5)
satellit 34 922958 960045 96045 960791 (4)
lnie 23
pkotvan 13
fholec 13 929958 964587 965516 965539 965544 965633 965731 (7)
kevin 12 963238 964356 (2)
jskladan 11
mkrizek 11 948099 (1)
lbrabec 9 964147 964176 (2)
vicodan 9
prcek 7 967748 (1)
ausil 4 959610 (1)
pschindl 3 958697 966586 (2)
tflink 2 962831 (1)
mmarhefk 2
jsedlak 2
tasssadar 2
Lalatendu 1 966025 (1)
jthorne 1
adamw 1 958512 (1)
jpospisi 1

1 This is a list of bug reports linked to the wiki results. They don’t have to be reported by that concrete person.

The two titans waged a battle, and in the end, Bob Lightfoot (boblfoot) prevailed, for the first time! 🙂 Congratulations, Bob. Andre Robatino (robatino) very closely followed. After them, there is Vojtěch Boček (tassadar), a high school student who spent two weeks on internship in Red Hat, and then nonamedotc with nearly exactly the same score. The number one Red Hatter became Adam Williamson (adamwill), closely followed by a few other Red Hat employees and Thomas Gilliard (satellit). Great job, guys, thank you! Of course, everyone else’s help is fully appreciated as well.

Fedora 19 Beta – Bugzilla

This is a trimmed list of people who reported bugs into Bugzilla against Fedora 19 in the specified time period. Compared to Fedora 19 Alpha statistics, the already high numbers went even higher – the number of reporters went up by 50%. Nice to see.

Test period: Fedora 19 Alpha – Fedora 19 Beta (2013-04-24 – 2013-05-28)
Reporters: 463
New reports: 1538

Name Reports submitted1 Excess reports2 Accepted blockers3
Adam Williamson 60 4 (6%) 2
Dhiru Kholia 49 1 (2%) 0
Mikhail 32 6 (18%) 0
Reartes Guillermo 29 6 (20%) 1
Stef Walter 29 1 (3%) 0
Chris Murphy 27 1 (3%) 5
vinesh teotia 27 0 (0%) 0
Andre Robatino 20 11 (55%) 4
Robert Lightfoot 18 2 (11%) 1
Lennart Poettering 18 0 (0%) 0
Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 16 1 (6%) 0
Patrik Kis 16 1 (6%) 0
Vojtěch Boček 16 1 (6%) 0
Dean Hunter 15 1 (6%) 0
IBM Bug Proxy 15 1 (6%) 0
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 15 0 (0%) 0
Grosswiler Roger 14 0 (0%) 0
Igor Gnatenko 14 4 (28%) 0
Luis Bazan 14 0 (0%) 0
Mikolaj Izdebski 13 0 (0%) 0
D. Charles Pyle 12 3 (25%) 0
David Spurek 12 3 (25%) 0
Hans de Goede 12 0 (0%) 0
Jeff Bastian 12 1 (8%) 0
Mark Salter 12 0 (0%) 0
Martin Banas 12 1 (8%) 0
Bill Nottingham 10 1 (10%) 0
Flóki Pálsson 10 2 (20%) 0
Jan Stodola 10 1 (10%) 0
John Reiser 10 0 (0%) 0
nucleo 10 1 (10%) 0
quickbooks.office at gmail.com 10 1 (10%) 0
Lawrenc Graves 9 0 (0%) 0
Matthew Miller 9 0 (0%) 0
Michael Scherer 9 0 (0%) 0
Mike FABIAN 9 1 (11%) 0
Need Real Name 9 4 (44%) 0
Nix\ 9 0 (0%) 0
satellit at bendbroadband.com 9 0 (0%) 0
Stephen Gallagher 9 1 (11%) 0
Dan Horák 8 0 (0%) 1
Alex Murray 8 0 (0%) 0
Amit Shah 8 0 (0%) 0
Jens Petersen 8 1 (12%) 0
Joachim Backes 8 2 (25%) 0
Marian Ganisin 8 1 (12%) 0
Mark Hamzy 8 2 (25%) 0
Orion Poplawski 8 1 (12%) 0
Peter Robinson 8 0 (0%) 0
Petr Schindler 8 1 (12%) 0
Simon Lewis 8 1 (12%) 0
Tomas Dolezal 8 0 (0%) 0
A.J. Werkman 7 0 (0%) 0
David Jaša 7 0 (0%) 0
Ed Greshko 7 0 (0%) 0
Richard W.M. Jones 7 0 (0%) 0
Evan Nemerson 6 0 (0%) 0
Jay Finger 6 0 (0%) 0
Jiri Koten 6 0 (0%) 0
Lukas -krtek.net- Novy 6 0 (0%) 0
Parag 6 1 (16%) 0
R P Herrold 6 4 (66%) 0
Vít Ondruch 6 1 (16%) 0
Pavel Holica 5 1 (20%) 1
a554335752 5 0 (0%) 0
Ales Ledvinka 5 0 (0%) 0
Andy Lawrence 5 0 (0%) 0
Cole Robinson 5 0 (0%) 0
Dan Mashal 5 0 (0%) 0
David Woodhouse 5 0 (0%) 0
Filip Holec 5 0 (0%) 0
Hein Kerstgens 5 0 (0%) 0
Joel 5 0 (0%) 0
Kalev Lember 5 0 (0%) 0
kuchiman 5 0 (0%) 0
Matthias Runge 5 0 (0%) 0
Michal Domonkos 5 0 (0%) 0
Patryk Zawadzki 5 0 (0%) 0
Philipp Dreimann 5 0 (0%) 0
Tim Flink 5 1 (20%) 0
Tim Waugh 5 1 (20%) 0
wangjiezhe at gmail.com 5 0 (0%) 0
William Brown 5 3 (60%) 0
…and also 380 other reporters who created less than 5 reports each, but 611 reports combined!

1 The total number of new reports (including “excess reports”). Reopened reports or reports with a changed version are not included, because it was not technically easy to retrieve those. This is one of the reasons why you shouldn’t take the numbers too seriously, but just as interesting and fun data.
2 Excess reports are those that were closed as NOTABUG, WONTFIX, WORKSFORME, CANTFIX or INSUFFICIENT_DATA. Excess reports are not necessarily a bad thing, but they make for interesting statistics. Close manual inspection is required to separate valuable excess reports from those which are less valuable.
3 This only includes reports that were created by that particular user and accepted as blockers afterwards. The user might have proposed other people’s reports as blockers, but this is not reflected in this number.

The gold crown in the number of bug reports is won by our famous “community monkey”, Red Hatter Adam Williamson. Dhiru Kholia continues to report packaging issues, as before. Mikhail and Reartes Guillermo lead the community efforts in standard bug reporting, together with Chris Murphy, vinesh teotia, Andre Robatino, Robert Lightfoot and others. Chris and Andre were very successful in proposing Beta blocker bugs.

It’s always nice to see how many people participate in bug reporting, the numbers are breathtaking. I hope it doesn’t mean that our quality is really low 🙂 I believe this indicates the opposite – we have an amazing number of people trying to ensure the quality is as high as possible. Thank you.

Fedora 19 Beta – updates testing

This is a trimmed list of people who provided feedback in Bodhi for all updates proposed into Fedora 19 in the specified time period. The purpose is to make sure that broken updates do not enter the stable repository and the release continuously stabilizes.

Test period: Fedora 19 Alpha – Fedora 19 Beta (2013-04-24 – 2013-05-28)
Testers: 164
Comments1: 1054

Name Updates commented
Robert C. Lightfoot (boblfoot) 117
Adam Williamson (adamwill) 102
misc 70
Piotr Drąg (raven) 56
Igor Gnatenko (ignatenkobrain) 55
Kevin Fenzi (kevin) 52
bitlord 47
T.C. Hollingsworth (patches) 45
Ankur Sinha (ankursinha) 42
Kalev Lember (kalev) 36
Alexander Kurtakov (akurtakov) 30
nonamedotc 28
Matthias Runge (mrunge) 25
Michael Schwendt (mschwendt) 18
gwei3 11
Jack Magne (jmagne) 10
Vasileios Keramidas (keramidas) 9
nucleo 9
Rex Dieter (rdieter) 8
mharmsen 8
Dan Mashal (vicodan) 8
Fabio Valentini (fafatheone) 8
Orion Poplawski (orion) 7
Arthur Scott Poore (spoore) 7
Tom Callaway (spot) 7
Heiko Adams (heikoada) 7
Wolfgang Ulbrich (raveit65) 6
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbyszek) 6
Axilleas Pipinellis (axilleas) 5
Christopher Meng (cicku) 5
Adam Jackson (ajax) 5
Tim Flink (tflink) 5
Joel Burleson-Davis (sysengbd) 4
Vojtech Bocek (tassadar) 4
Tao Wu (wutao85) 4
Mamoru Tasaka (mtasaka) 4
robatino 4
Endi Sukma Dewata (edewata) 4
Elad Alfassa (elad) 3
David A. Marlin (dmarlin) 3
Mike FABIAN (mfabian) 3
Stef Walter (stefw) 3
Chris Murphy (chrismurphy) 3
David King (amigadave) 3
Daniel J Walsh (dwalsh) 3
halfie 3
John Reiser (jreiser) 3
Patrik Kis (pkis) 3
Petr Schindler (pschindl) 3
Martin Krizek (mkrizek) 3
…and also 114 other reporters who created less than 3 reports each, but 140 reports combined!

1 If a person provides multiple comments to a single update, it is considered as a single comment. Karma value is not taken into account.

When compared to F19 Alpha statistics, the number of reporters increased by half and the number of comments increased more than 3 times. Nice. This is one of the easiest way how to contribute to Fedora quality and I’m very glad that the numbers soared so much. Our hero is, as usual, Robert C. Lightfoot (boblfoot)! The other high-profile community contributors include misc, Piotr Drąg (raven), Igor Gnatenko (ignatenkobrain), bitlordT.C. Hollingsworth (patches), Ankur Sinha (ankursinha) and others. The most active Red Hatter was, once again, Adam Williamson. Great job, everyone.

Summary

I’m very glad to see a visible increase in test activities since F19 Alpha. Surely, the officially released milestone composes (i.e. Alpha, Beta) help to attract more testers than just the regular contributors base. It will be interesting to see how the picture changes between Fedora 19 Beta and Final.

If you are interested in raising the Fedora quality up, help us out. Read QA/Join, follow the announcements and talk to us in #fedora-qa on IRC and test list. We will love to see you!


When reading the statistics, please take it with a grain of salt. The numbers are not directly comparable. People might see some reports as more valuable than others. Some people tested a lot of components, but haven’t found many problems (but that also helps). Some people used their skills in other areas than those mentioned. This is not meant to be a comparison chart, but a well-meant “thank you” letter.
The statistics were generated by these scripts.

The heroes of Fedora 19 Beta testing