Project

General

Profile

Actions

coordination #40475

closed

[functional][y][saga] Establish YaST team split

Added by riafarov over 6 years ago. Updated about 4 years ago.

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Category:
Enhancement to existing tests
Target version:
Start date:
2018-10-09
Due date:
2019-11-19
% Done:

100%

Estimated time:
(Total: 53.00 h)
Difficulty:

Description

Motivation

We agreed that we should focus on YaST more as it's developed internally and close feedback loop.
Basic idea is to do QA with backlog which is synced with development. It includes integration testing, as we currently do, but more focused on YaST and being a precondition for other tests if installation doesn't work.
It will allow us to test features during the development and provide feedback, so it's cheaper and easier to change things. Additionally, it will prevent broken build from reaching integration testing when multiple QA teams will be affected

Acceptance Criteria

  • AC1: separate job group for QA SLE YaST team; this should concern o.s.d
  • AC2: We know how the openSUSE community, including release managers of Leap and Tumbleweed, would like to benefit from this (and if they see this as a benefit)
  • AC3: We have a clear list of test scenarios which the QA SLE YaST team owns
  • AC4: The purpose of each test scenario owned by the Y team is described

Tasks

Short-term: split job group, take responsibility for the review, set it as a precondition for other functional tests. If installation is broken, there is not much sense in testing other components.
Establish process to judge overall product quality.
Long-term: sub-team joins SysMgmt team for the QA and helping to establish earlier testing

Recommendation: Take care of better communication around this change (as discussed in f2f conversation - perhaps even a simple set of slides. We hate them. But we need to get the message across)

Further points

  • reduce scope for the reviewer (better focus), hence better understanding of the tests
  • will be easier to involve YaST team and collaborate with them
  • not much benefits for U-subteam, but definitely no harm
  • potentially will affect collaboration between subteams, learn HPC/HA experience

Subtasks 17 (0 open17 closed)

coordination #42191: [functional][y][epic] Have separate job group for YaST subteamResolvedriafarov2018-10-092019-03-26

Actions
action #42227: [functional][y] Move relevant scenarios to YaST job group on OSDResolvedriafarov2018-10-092018-12-04

Actions
action #42236: [functional][y] Identify all scenarios to be split into two parts, to have one part in YaST job groupResolvedriafarov2018-10-092018-10-23

Actions
action #42503: [functional][y] Define test matrix for the YaST job groupResolvedriafarov2018-10-152019-03-26

Actions
action #42578: [functional][y][spike] Rethink what is the purpose of create_hdd* scenariosResolvedJERiveraMoya2018-10-162019-02-12

Actions
action #42914: [functional][y][u] Update review workflow for split domainsResolvedoorlov2018-10-252019-01-15

Actions
action #43796: [functional][y] Implement ext4 specific test for autoyast installationResolvedJERiveraMoya2018-11-142018-12-04

Actions
coordination #42494: [epic][functional][y] Split/adapt scenarios to move installer related part to YaST specific job groupResolvedriafarov2018-10-252019-11-19

Actions
action #42941: [sle][functional][y] implement validation for lvm-full-encrypt and lvm-encrypt-separate-boot test suitesResolvedybonatakis2018-10-252019-03-26

Actions
action #48173: [sle][functional][y] implement validation for encrypt lvm test suitesResolvedmloviska2018-10-252019-07-30

Actions
action #48401: [functional][y] Implement test module to validate iscsi_ibft installationResolvedmloviska2019-02-252019-04-09

Actions
action #48176: [sle][functional][y] implement validation for autoyast_gnome test suiteResolvedybonatakis2018-10-252019-03-26

Actions
action #52508: [functional][y] Validate skip_registration+all-packages-iso scenario with modules which make senseRejectedriafarov2019-06-032019-10-08

Actions
action #53258: [functional][y] Validate installation with btrfsResolvedoorlov2019-06-182019-08-13

Actions
action #54779: [sle][functional][y] fix validation tests for encrypted lvm test suitesResolvedoorlov2018-10-252019-08-27

Actions
action #55421: [functional][y] change btrfs test suite as per #53258Resolvedoorlov2019-06-182019-08-27

Actions
action #56990: [functional][y] Validate minimal+base scenario with modules which make senseClosedybonatakis2019-06-032019-11-19

Actions

Related issues 2 (0 open2 closed)

Related to openQA Tests (public) - action #41852: [functional][y][sle] add more staging testsResolvedoorlov2018-10-012018-11-20

Actions
Related to openQA Project (public) - action #42851: [functional][y][tools] Implement view for multiple job groupsResolvedoorlov2018-10-242018-12-04

Actions
Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF