On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 07:55:06AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 7:43 AM, Michael Catanzaro
> My $0.02 is that none of the reasons we requested the blocker criterion
> have changed. Dual boot with macOS is very important to attracting new
> users -- we're explicitly targeting macOS users, that's the user group
> where we think we have real potential for significant growth -- and I
> continue to prefer we block the release indefinitely if it's not
> working. We can't afford for our next Ars review to say "the installer
> is broken, try again next year."
Then we, as a project, need to back that up with sufficient hardware
and test resources. Otherwise it is nothing more than a wish and will
continue to lead to problems like this.
Adam W pinpointed an issue with "burner" Macs. I have a MBP myself
that I treat as an appliance. I use it for Pro Tools and my non-FOSS
related creative pursuits. I'm well aware of Apple's tactics when it
comes to tight integration and OS/HW integrity. I don't mess with it
at a low level, and don't test bare-metal installation on it (although
I do test the live OS from USB).
Also Michael pointed out something about a certain big company ;-)
needing to provide hardware for the QA team. To the best of my
knowledge, that company doesn't have a stake in putting products on
e.g. Mac laptops. This is a community project, so let's see how we
can handle this as a community, starting with the Workstation WG (as
opposed to QA).
That being said, I arranged to get an additional drive with some small
$$ available from said company. I can use it to help with testing,
since I happen to have hardware. My hope is other Workstation WG
members will join me. Else we *do* look at removing criteria, not
just throw them over the wall and expect QA to deal with it.
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
- - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com