As discussed in the Fedora QA meeting today, below are the proposed changes to release blocking desktops on ARM.
== Summary ==
Proposed changes to the Desktop release criteria for ARM and AArch64 in Fedora 32: * drop Xfce on 32-bit ARM from release blocking desktops * add Workstation on AArch64 to release blocking desktops
== Detailed Description ==
In Fedora 32 we will have a couple new additions to release blocking deliverables including IoT and CoreOS. In order to reduce the overall test coverage and release blocking desktops we propose no longer blocking on the 32-Bit ARM Xfce Desktop spin, and adding Workstation on AArch64 as a release blocking desktop.
Release blocking image changes: Drop: Spins/armhfp/images/Fedora-Xfce-armhfp-_RELEASE_MILESTONE_-sda.raw.xz Add: Workstation/aarch64/images/Fedora-Workstation-aarch64-_RELEASE_MILESTONE_-sda.raw.xz
Testing will still be completed on the 32-Bit ARM Xfce spin to ensure it continues to work, but any issues found will not block the overall release.
For a full list of the current release blocking deliverables, visit the wiki[1].
If you have any questions or concerns, please respond for further discussion.
Regards, Paul
[1] - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/32/ReleaseBlocking
On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 10:22 PM Paul Whalen pwhalen@redhat.com wrote:
As discussed in the Fedora QA meeting today, below are the proposed changes to release blocking desktops on ARM.
== Summary ==
Proposed changes to the Desktop release criteria for ARM and AArch64 in Fedora 32:
- drop Xfce on 32-bit ARM from release blocking desktops
- add Workstation on AArch64 to release blocking desktops
== Detailed Description ==
In Fedora 32 we will have a couple new additions to release blocking deliverables including IoT and CoreOS. In order to reduce the overall test coverage and release blocking desktops we propose no longer blocking on the 32-Bit ARM Xfce Desktop spin, and adding Workstation on AArch64 as a release blocking desktop.
Release blocking image changes: Drop: Spins/armhfp/images/Fedora-Xfce-armhfp-_RELEASE_MILESTONE_-sda.raw.xz Add: Workstation/aarch64/images/Fedora-Workstation-aarch64-_RELEASE_MILESTONE_-sda.raw.xz
I'm not a part of ARM SIG so I don't get to vote. But as part of QA, I just want to say that we're OK with that change. Workstation desktop already gets full testing coverage on x86_64, so having it on the release blocking it twice makes our life easier (compared to two different desktop environments). We will need to figure out how complete testing we can provide to aarch64 Workstation, but that will be part of a different thread. For completeness, there's also this Workstation WG ticket [1] where we talk about both parts (Workstation being blocking on aarch64, and the level of QA we can provide).
On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 4:22 PM Paul Whalen pwhalen@redhat.com wrote:
Proposed changes to the Desktop release criteria for ARM and AArch64 in Fedora 32:
- drop Xfce on 32-bit ARM from release blocking desktops
- add Workstation on AArch64 to release blocking desktops
Program Management is okay with this proposal, but ideally I'd like to see it go through the self-contained change process. Any chance you'd be okay with holding this until F33? In either case, FESCo will need to approve it, but it has my support.
Proposed changes to the Desktop release criteria for ARM and AArch64 in Fedora 32:
- drop Xfce on 32-bit ARM from release blocking desktops
- add Workstation on AArch64 to release blocking desktops
Program Management is okay with this proposal, but ideally I'd like to see it go through the self-contained change process. Any chance you'd be okay with holding this until F33? In either case, FESCo will need to approve it, but it has my support.
If QA is fine to continue to do all the QA on the current bits sure, in terms of engineering etc the feature is complete (and actually was going back a number of releases), this is really just a QA/process change. Personally I'd like to get it done now and move on with life but it's mostly not going to affect me much either way so ¯_(ツ)_/¯
----- Original Message -----
Proposed changes to the Desktop release criteria for ARM and AArch64 in Fedora 32:
- drop Xfce on 32-bit ARM from release blocking desktops
- add Workstation on AArch64 to release blocking desktops
Program Management is okay with this proposal, but ideally I'd like to see it go through the self-contained change process. Any chance you'd be okay with holding this until F33? In either case, FESCo will need to approve it, but it has my support.
If QA is fine to continue to do all the QA on the current bits sure, in terms of engineering etc the feature is complete (and actually was going back a number of releases), this is really just a QA/process
There won't be much change in workload for QA, we're dropping one release blocking desktop and adding another desktop that is also widely tested on x86_64.
change. Personally I'd like to get it done now and move on with life but it's mostly not going to affect me much either way so ¯_(ツ)_/¯ _______________________________________________ arm mailing list -- arm@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to arm-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 7:26 PM Ben Cotton bcotton@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 4:22 PM Paul Whalen pwhalen@redhat.com wrote:
Proposed changes to the Desktop release criteria for ARM and AArch64 in
Fedora 32:
- drop Xfce on 32-bit ARM from release blocking desktops
- add Workstation on AArch64 to release blocking desktops
Program Management is okay with this proposal, but ideally I'd like to see it go through the self-contained change process. Any chance you'd be okay with holding this until F33? In either case, FESCo will need to approve it, but it has my support.
Because there's no development to do, it's just a change in the blocking deliverables list, I think we can do it right away. Peter, Paul, can you please file a FESCo ticket?
----- Original Message -----
On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 7:26 PM Ben Cotton < bcotton@redhat.com > wrote:
On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 4:22 PM Paul Whalen < pwhalen@redhat.com > wrote:
Proposed changes to the Desktop release criteria for ARM and AArch64 in Fedora 32:
- drop Xfce on 32-bit ARM from release blocking desktops
- add Workstation on AArch64 to release blocking desktops
Program Management is okay with this proposal, but ideally I'd like to see it go through the self-contained change process. Any chance you'd be okay with holding this until F33? In either case, FESCo will need to approve it, but it has my support.
Because there's no development to do, it's just a change in the blocking deliverables list, I think we can do it right away. Peter, Paul, can you please file a FESCo ticket?
Fesco Ticket - https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2339
arm mailing list -- arm@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to arm-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
Proposed changes to the Desktop release criteria for ARM and AArch64 in Fedora 32:
- drop Xfce on 32-bit ARM from release blocking desktops
- add Workstation on AArch64 to release blocking desktops
I am not following recent developments of chap arm based mini computers (read: Raspberry Pis and alike), hence my question might be a bit stupid here, but isn't Workstation a bit too resource-consuming for devices our users are likely to run Fedora "desktop" on? I'm fine if we are targeting the AArch64 based laptops, but are we OK with recommending either Workstation or non-bocking spins for arm devices with less than 4GB RAM?
On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 11:15 PM Miro Hrončok mhroncok@redhat.com wrote:
Proposed changes to the Desktop release criteria for ARM and AArch64 in Fedora 32:
- drop Xfce on 32-bit ARM from release blocking desktops
- add Workstation on AArch64 to release blocking desktops
I am not following recent developments of chap arm based mini computers (read: Raspberry Pis and alike), hence my question might be a bit stupid here, but isn't Workstation a bit too resource-consuming for devices our users are likely to run Fedora "desktop" on? I'm fine if we are targeting the AArch64 based laptops, but are we OK with recommending either Workstation or non-bocking spins for arm devices with less than 4GB RAM?
There's quite a few devices now with 4+gb of RAM which are support(able) in Fedora 32.
On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 4:15 PM Miro Hrončok mhroncok@redhat.com wrote:
Proposed changes to the Desktop release criteria for ARM and AArch64 in Fedora 32:
- drop Xfce on 32-bit ARM from release blocking desktops
- add Workstation on AArch64 to release blocking desktops
I am not following recent developments of chap arm based mini computers (read: Raspberry Pis and alike), hence my question might be a bit stupid here, but isn't Workstation a bit too resource-consuming for devices our users are likely to run Fedora "desktop" on? I'm fine if we are targeting the AArch64 based laptops, but are we OK with recommending either Workstation or non-bocking spins for arm devices with less than 4GB RAM?
Are there significant resource consumption differences between GNOME and GNOME Classic? Would GNOME Classic by default on aarch64 be a valid option?
Proposed changes to the Desktop release criteria for ARM and AArch64 in Fedora 32:
- drop Xfce on 32-bit ARM from release blocking desktops
- add Workstation on AArch64 to release blocking desktops
I am not following recent developments of chap arm based mini computers (read: Raspberry Pis and alike), hence my question might be a bit stupid here, but isn't Workstation a bit too resource-consuming for devices our users are likely to run Fedora "desktop" on? I'm fine if we are targeting the AArch64 based laptops, but are we OK with recommending either Workstation or non-bocking spins for arm devices with less than 4GB RAM?
Are there significant resource consumption differences between GNOME and GNOME Classic? Would GNOME Classic by default on aarch64 be a valid option?
My understanding is that Classic is purely a look and feel thing.
On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 18:21 +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
Proposed changes to the Desktop release criteria for ARM and AArch64 in Fedora 32:
- drop Xfce on 32-bit ARM from release blocking desktops
- add Workstation on AArch64 to release blocking desktops
I am not following recent developments of chap arm based mini computers (read: Raspberry Pis and alike), hence my question might be a bit stupid here, but isn't Workstation a bit too resource-consuming for devices our users are likely to run Fedora "desktop" on? I'm fine if we are targeting the AArch64 based laptops, but are we OK with recommending either Workstation or non-bocking spins for arm devices with less than 4GB RAM?
Are there significant resource consumption differences between GNOME and GNOME Classic? Would GNOME Classic by default on aarch64 be a valid option?
My understanding is that Classic is purely a look and feel thing.
Me too, more or less. They're still both composited by GNOME Shell. Maybe Classic uses fewer 3D effects, but I doubt that's going to make a significant difference.
On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 2:52 AM Paul Whalen pwhalen@redhat.com wrote:
As discussed in the Fedora QA meeting today, below are the proposed changes to release blocking desktops on ARM.
== Summary ==
Proposed changes to the Desktop release criteria for ARM and AArch64 in Fedora 32:
- drop Xfce on 32-bit ARM from release blocking desktops
- add Workstation on AArch64 to release blocking desktops
== Detailed Description ==
In Fedora 32 we will have a couple new additions to release blocking deliverables including IoT and CoreOS. In order to reduce the overall test coverage and release blocking desktops we propose no longer blocking on the 32-Bit ARM Xfce Desktop spin, and adding Workstation on AArch64 as a release blocking desktop.
Release blocking image changes: Drop: Spins/armhfp/images/Fedora-Xfce-armhfp-_RELEASE_MILESTONE_-sda.raw.xz Add: Workstation/aarch64/images/Fedora-Workstation-aarch64-_RELEASE_MILESTONE_-sda.raw.xz
Testing will still be completed on the 32-Bit ARM Xfce spin to ensure it continues to work, but any issues found will not block the overall release.
For a full list of the current release blocking deliverables, visit the wiki[1].
If you have any questions or concerns, please respond for further discussion.
Regards, Paul
[1] - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/32/ReleaseBlocking
I am +1 to the proposal from the QA side of things.