Am Dienstag, den 09.04.2013, 17:28 -0400 schrieb Bill Nottingham:
Joerg Simon (jsimon@fedoraproject.org) said:
can you please give us a feedback regarding http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/spins/2013-April/002886.html
I am not the spin wrangler - I merely created the F19 spins page as a copy of F18 because someone from QA asked me to so they had size targets, etc.
CC'ing Christoph, he can likely give you a better answer.
I agree with Bill that http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/19/Spins should be considered the authoritative list of spins. There is no reason to only go for the desktop spins and exclude old spins from reoccurrence if they are actively maintained.
In addition to that, we have some spins listed as ready for SIG: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Spins_Ready_For_SIG
I have no idea, why some of the spins are there: * Design Suite was around for ages and is now actively maintained again. * Same for the Games spin. * Fedora jam was approved be the SIG in the F18 cycle but didn't make it. * Java spin is new, afaik it was not yet approved. The owner seems unresponsive at least he has not responded to my questions in the wiki since December. Also, the board had some issues with the name. * Mate is new, too. I had to nag Dan repeatedly to finish his stuff, but he made it and we should officially bless it.
So as far as I can see, MATE is the only new spin we need to care about. As we are likely to not have a meeting and we are running out of time, I suggest we use the trac ticket I created for approval. All spins SIG members, please cast your votes at https://fedorahosted.org/spin-kickstarts/ticket/46 I want at least 3 SIG members +1 the spin. If you have any questions, the ticket is the place to ask them.
Also, I want people to commit to testing the spins. It's not enough to rubberstamp a spin, you have to actually test it. I want all spins to be tested and signed of by at least two people, the spins wrangler and one other person. They will need to run all relevant test cases for the desktop they use, plus all spin-specific test cases (if there are any) and document their findings in the wiki. Basically the same process that we apply to the desktops will be extended throughout all spins.
This being said: Even if your spin is approved or reoccurring and listed at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/19/Spins it might not make it. We (that is me and rel-eng) will not release something that was not tested properly.
Kind regards, Christoph
Hi,
--- On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Christoph Wickert christoph.wickert@gmail.com wrote: | I want all spins to be | tested and signed of by at least two people, the spins wrangler and one | other person. --
When, where and how should this sign-off process take place?
SK
Am Donnerstag, den 11.04.2013, 20:01 +0530 schrieb Shakthi Kannan:
Hi,
--- On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Christoph Wickert christoph.wickert@gmail.com wrote: | I want all spins to be | tested and signed of by at least two people, the spins wrangler and one | other person. --
When, where and how should this sign-off process take place?
Maybe "sign-off" was the wrong word in this context. It needs to be tested by two persons and their tests and findings should be documented in the QA section of wiki. Basically I want the same we do for the desktop spins for the other spins, too.
Kind regards, Christoph
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 15:08:13 +0200, Christoph Wickert christoph.wickert@gmail.com wrote:
Also, I want people to commit to testing the spins. It's not enough to rubberstamp a spin, you have to actually test it. I want all spins to be tested and signed of by at least two people, the spins wrangler and one other person. They will need to run all relevant test cases for the desktop they use, plus all spin-specific test cases (if there are any) and document their findings in the wiki. Basically the same process that we apply to the desktops will be extended throughout all spins.
Can you be more specific where you want this recorded? For example https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_19_Alpha_RC2_Desktop doesn't have a place to record tests for live images other than the desktops. We also don't get RCs for spins other than at final, so would need to test nightly composes.
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Christoph Wickert christoph.wickert@gmail.com wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 09.04.2013, 17:28 -0400 schrieb Bill Nottingham:
Joerg Simon (jsimon@fedoraproject.org) said:
can you please give us a feedback regarding http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/spins/2013-April/002886.html
I am not the spin wrangler - I merely created the F19 spins page as a copy of F18 because someone from QA asked me to so they had size targets, etc.
CC'ing Christoph, he can likely give you a better answer.
I agree with Bill that http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/19/Spins should be considered the authoritative list of spins. There is no reason to only go for the desktop spins and exclude old spins from reoccurrence if they are actively maintained.
In addition to that, we have some spins listed as ready for SIG: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Spins_Ready_For_SIG
I have no idea, why some of the spins are there: * Design Suite was around for ages and is now actively maintained again. * Same for the Games spin. * Fedora jam was approved be the SIG in the F18 cycle but didn't make it. * Java spin is new, afaik it was not yet approved. The owner seems unresponsive at least he has not responded to my questions in the wiki since December. Also, the board had some issues with the name.
The Java spin can't be called the Java spin due to trademark issues so if it does happen it'll have to be called something else, I can remember this going to the board last cycle.
Peter
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 04/11/2013 02:08 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
- Java spin is new, afaik it was not yet approved. The owner seems
unresponsive at least he has not responded to my questions in the wiki since December. Also, the board had some issues with the name.
Hi,
I'm the one who proposed the Java spin. I sent a message about it here on the list[0] the day after you reviewed the submission on the wiki. My general feeling at the time was that it was way too late to be adding spins and I had lost hope of it becoming an official spin ages before that, since I had made the original proposal back in July/August which was the original deadline; and it had changed considerably in the meantime. I guess I was waiting to see when the approval meeting was going to be to see if I would have had time to introduce some of those other changes, but the meeting never happened either.
I also (in what I would consider a reasonable time frame) addressed the naming issue here on the list[1].
The reason I'm pointing these out, is that I've always had an odd feeling that even though they're showing up on the list archives, they didn't arrive in anyone's inbox and were never seen. Does that sound at all likely? It's mostly because almost all of the times that the spin has been mentioned on the list by people other than me, it's to say something like it was never brought up on the list or that the maintainer is being unresponsive; then when I do reply or bring it up otherwise, there's no comment or response. Of course it's also possible that I structure my messages in a way that it's too much effort to respond, or something.
[0] http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/spins/2012-December/002639.html [1] http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/spins/2012-December/002645.html
Gerard.