On Wed, 2015-05-13 at 07:53 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 05/13/15 07:45, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-05-13 at 00:26 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > If, and I say if since I've not tested, this fixes the session
> > > restore issues of Plasma 5 then to me it is a *must* for F22
> > > release.
> > Ditto.
> Session restore doesn't seem like a great FE candidate, since
> don't usually use sessions on live images. Post-install issues like
> that can be handled fine with updates; the update will be
> available as
> a 0-day if karma'ed.
I suppose I may have mis-understood the question. As I didn't read
this as being "live image" centric.
Basically, things that can't be fixed with updates are the prime
candidates for blocker/FE status. So, installer bugs, bugs that are
visible when booted live, and kernel/X/etc. showstoppers which would
prevent you getting an install done.
Issues that are apparent only after install *can* be blocker/FE bugs,
but there's a higher bar for it.
I generally don't use/test the Live images all that much. But,
folks use the Live images as a way of deciding if they will use the
release and if the Live image supports logging out/in.....then I
still feel it is a must.
You *can* log out / log in on the live image, but it's not something
that's very commonly used, I don't think.
One question. Would a netinstall eliminate the need to install and
then update to get the fix?
A default netinstall would, yes - by default network installs use the
updates repository as a package source. You can disable it, but that
Immediately after installing from the live image the bug would be
present, but it'd be solved on the first update.
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net