=== bladernr_ is now known as bladernr_afk
=== balloons_ is now known as balloons
=== zyga-afk is now known as zyga
=== bdmurray_ is now known as bdmurray
[10:10] <htorque> hey everyone! i just completed the unity checkbox tests and i was wondering if there's a way to verify that the results have been submitted?
[10:12] <balloons> htorque -- awesome
[10:13] <balloons> right now there isn't a good way in the tool to let you know your results got upped..
[10:15] <htorque> balloons: k, thanks! :-)
[10:20] <jibel> htorque, you can check it there http://results-tracker.ubuntu.com/~htorque
[10:21] <htorque> jibel: nice, thank you!
[10:22] <jibel> but then you'll have to browse http://results-tracker.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/+testruns to find yours.
[10:23] <htorque> i guess it's okay to have the date to verify the successful upload :-)
[10:24] <mvo> jibel: hey, how is the universe test going?
[10:24] <jibel> htorque, http://results-tracker.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/precise/+testruns/49
[10:25] <jibel> mvo, universe broke :)
[10:27] <htorque> jibel: oh, that's a lot of false "Uninitiated" tests. maybe that's an issue with restarting checkbox? i unintentionally closed it a couple of times when pressing the Esc key. :-(
[10:27] <jibel> mvo, there are dependency issues especially this one
[10:27] <jibel> mvo, https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/precise-upgrade-lts/PROFILE=lts-universe-i386,alderamin-upgrade=alderamin-upgrade/7/
[10:28] <jibel> mvo, it fails to upgrade dpkg
[10:29] <mvo> thanks jibel, let me look
[10:30] <mvo> meh, looks nasty
=== _salem is now known as salem_
[11:52] <Machinista> Greetings.
[11:53] <Machinista> I'm interested in joining the QA team.  Is this a suitable channel for such things?
=== lool- is now known as lool
[11:58] <davmor2> Machinista: this is the right channel indeed,  if you look at the subject for the channel it gives you most of the info you need to get involved and join up to the mailing list
[12:00] <Machinista> Hi.  Ok, thanks.  I've joined the mail-list already but stil need to sign the code of conduct
[12:01] <Machinista> Apologies in adavance; I am not particularly irc literate
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel
=== bladernr_afk is now known as bladernr_
[15:56] <jadahl> hi. reporting test results to ubuntu friendly, should they represent what "works out of the box" or what "works after fixing it"
[15:56] <jadahl> ?
[15:57] <jadahl> and, if fixing was involved, is there anyway to link to such a manual?
[15:57] <roadmr> jadahl: hi! thanks for asking! how much tweaking did you need to do to get things to work?
[15:57] <jadahl> well, regarding my laptop, quite some (http://help.ubuntu.com/community/Asus_U36SD
[15:57] <roadmr> jadahl: please submit the results from the system as it is now (i.e. working with tweaks and fixes)
[15:57] <jadahl> all the yellow things works (or works partly) after tweaking
[15:58] <roadmr> jadahl: then if you want to document what you did, there's a "send us feedback" link where you can comment on what you had to do to get it all to work
[15:58] <jadahl> is there any way to link to that wiki page or similar for a specific model so a user can easily find how to make her/his computer work?
[15:58] <roadmr> jadahl: you can link to that page in a feedback comment
[15:58] <jadahl> ok
[15:59] <jadahl> i see
[15:59] <roadmr> jadahl: thanks for testing! and for asking, we like to see how people are using Ubuntu Friendly
[16:00] <jadahl> no problem
[16:00] <jadahl> what'd happen to the feedback? would they be public some how?
[16:02] <roadmr> jadahl: it's public, I think it gets put in as a question
[16:02] <jadahl> do you have an example?
[16:02] <roadmr> jadahl: sure, give me a sec
[16:03] <roadmr> jadahl: here: https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu-friendly/+question/181678
[16:06] <jadahl> will it be linked from friendly.ubuntu.com /
[16:06] <jadahl> ?
[16:07] <roadmr> it should be, if not, it's a bug
[16:07] <roadmr> let me check
[16:09] <jadahl> also, if something "kind of" works (in my case, resume works only if I wait for 20s after suspending), how should I report it?
[16:12] <roadmr> hm, you could add it in the comment
[16:13] <jadahl> but there is still a "yes/no", should that be "yes" in such a case?
[16:13] <jadahl> your does the result need to be perfect?
[16:13] <roadmr> jadahl: if you see it working, you should say "yes"
[16:14] <jadahl> should I regard "resume within 20s causes hard reboot otherwise works fine" as working?
[16:14] <jadahl> asking because I'm not sure what I should answer on that question :P
[16:15] <roadmr> jadahl: we rely on statistics to decide that stuff
[16:15] <roadmr> jadahl: if you consider it's working for you, answer "yes"
[16:15] <roadmr> if then 9 other people answer "no" because they consider it to be faulty, it'll have a 90% failure rate
[16:15] <jadahl> well, I'm quite "understanding" regarding these kinds of issues so that'll be a "yes" then
[16:16] <jadahl> anyway, that makes it clearer, thanks
[16:16] <roadmr> jadahl: I'd say "yes" too - if you consider it works well for you, that's the right answer
[16:38] <stgraber> bdmurray: production QA website has been updated
[16:38] <stgraber> *ISO tracker
[17:15] <htorque> i have a user that ran the unity checkbox test, but sending of the result failed. he still has the submission.xml file, can he still submit his results somehow?
=== salem_ is now known as _salem
=== bladernr_ is now known as bladernr_afk