Project:Quality Assurance/Meeting Agenda
This page should have topics to be discussed by the QA team at its next meeting. If you are a QA team member and you cannot make a meeting, please email the team beforehand with any opinions you would like brought up on the topics to be discussed. If you are a developer who wants the QA team to review a policy or bug at an upcoming meeting, please let us know (in #gentoo-qa) before adding it to the list of topics. Meetings are held on the third Wednesday of every month at 1900 UTC in #gentoo-qa.
The next meeting is set for: TBA
- 1 Topics of Wednesday, February 18, 2015
- 2 Topics of Wednesday, December 3, 2014
- 3 Topics of Wednesday, May 21, 2014
- 4 Topics of Wednesday, April 23, 2014
- 5 Topics of Wednesday April 16, 2014
- 6 Topics of Wednesday March 26, 2014
- 7 Topics of Wednesday February 19, 2014
- 8 Topics of Wednesday January 29, 2014
Topics of Wednesday, February 18, 2015
- Roll call (creffett, mgorny, mrueg, patrick, pinkbyte, tommy, ulm, williamh, wired, zerochaos, zlogene)
- Official welcome for mrueg as new Team Member and zlogene as Deputy Lead
- Games policy: Owner/permissions of top-level dirs, group for setgid games (bug #537580).
- Developers ignoring (not updating) eclass/ChangeLog file.
- Status check: Missing QA meeting summaries.
- Status check: GTK USE flags.
- Status check: Followup on decisions of past QA and Council meetings.
- Open bugs with QA involvement.
Topics of Wednesday, December 3, 2014
- Roll call (creffett, mgorny, patrick, Pinkbyte, tommy, ulm, williamh, wired, zerochaos, Zlogene)
- Review the new QA Inquiry Wiki article.
- Review the games team policies: games group, forcing /usr/games when upstream does not use it, games.eclass (points 3-5 in mgorny's reply of last Council agenda, deferred by Council to be discussed by QA).
- Repoman checks for missing slot values/operators in dependencies and missing subslot operators.
- Making global-scope 'use*', 'has_version' and 'best_version' fatal in EAPI 6 (already fatal in all EAPIs via PMS yet not forced by Portage yet).
- Use of <maintainer/> and <herd/> elements in metadata.xml.
- ncurses[tinfo] flag used to change library ABI, bug #487844.
- Status checks: Missing QA meeting summaries; GTK USE flags; followup on decisions of past QA and Council meetings; bugs to which QA is assigned or CCed.
- Election of new QA lead (due 2014-12-16).
- Open floor.
Topics of Wednesday, May 21, 2014
- Review the new QA Inquiry Wiki article.
- Status check of the GTK USE flags response, perhaps check the spreadsheet to discuss the intermediate work.
- Status check of the missing QA meeting summaries, perhaps work together to get it done.
- Status check on what has been decided in past QA and/or Council meetings.
Topics of Wednesday, April 23, 2014
- What do we do with hacked pkgconfig files? (Link)
- Are there unclarities wrt what "QA team" and similar things mean in GLEP 48? An individual or the whole team? With agreement or not? (Link)
- Move QA policies to the devmanual? (Suggested in "Move tree-related policies to devmanual" mail to our alias)
- Where and how will we document what QA processes for both current and future Gentoo Developers and QA members? (Per Council meeting: "the council notes that QA is looking into documenting their process").
Topics of Wednesday April 16, 2014
Portage tree business
... based on communication on our alias and/or IRC channel:
- Where are the GNOME and QA team at with the GTK flag issue? (Mail was sent, either defer agenda item or ask leio or eva [were working on something])
- Rely on dynamic dependencies (has binpkg and subslot problems), revision bumps (causes some unnecessary rebuilds) or keep status quo when changing dependencies in an existing ebuild?
- Short look at the recent QA assigned bugs: How do we deal with bug #507808 [metadata breakage]? Do we help with bug #440214 [help requested with readme.gentoo.eclass]? ...
QA processes and disagreements
... requested to be discussed by Council members:
- Handling disagreements among ourselves (wrt two recent alias threads); do we need to change the QA process, or is the problem elsewhere?
More QA concerns
... raised by Gentoo Developers on the Gentoo mailing lists:
- What will we do about the missing QA meeting logs and summaries?
Topics of Wednesday March 26, 2014
- Rotating meeting times/other ways to get everyone to be able to make a meeting
- vapier stabilizing on experimental arches (continued from last meeting, waiting on the Council to weigh in) (still continued, council hadn't met when we held the meeting)
- Revisit policy on dropping packages to unstable when stabilization takes too long (need input from Zero_Chaos)
- Status update on GTK flag issue
- (time permitting) How to get more developers helping with QA work?
Topics of Wednesday February 19, 2014
- Deprecating/banning EAPIs
- Revisit policy on dropping packages to unstable when stabilization takes too long
- vapier stabilizing on experimental arches (continued from last meeting, waiting on the Council to weigh in)
- Multislot issue (continued, results from forums poll)
- Review GTK USE flag situation as discussed on mailing lists (continued from last month)
Topics of Wednesday January 29, 2014
- What should our workflow be for making policy?
- What communication is expected when making changes to other devs' packages
- What to do about the GTK USE flag situation? (hasufell's recent emails)
- Official recommendation for how to recommend optional RDEPs (relevant to bug 498832)
- What large projects do we want to tackle as a team? (See and/or add them to "Possible Future Project" in Project:Quality_Assurance/Current_projects)
- Suggested project: Assist in migrating ebuilds away from EAPI 0/1/2 to latest.
- How do we evaluate whether future stabilization improves or becomes worse? How bad is stabilization really at the moment? How can we make more users and/or developers interested in arch testing (and/or Gentoo)? Do we want to make a policy change now, or delay considering it till a later meeting in the future? ...? (WilliamH's stabilization thread)