On 12/01/2009 09:33 PM, Mike Chambers wrote:
On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 20:24 -0600, Todd wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Jesse Keating<jkeating(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 16:32 -0600, Mike Chambers wrote:
>>> I believe I remember you stating this some time during F12 development
>>> but I can't remember when. I believe it was stated that if you want to
>>> run rawhide and need to do an install, you'll either install F12 and yum
>>> update to rawhide from there (maybe after doing a completed update
>>> first?) or if in development in middle of a cycle, you install the
>>> beta/rc/whatever and update to rawhide from that.
>>> (obviously if test images are created that goes to this as well)
>>> Does that sound about correct?
>> That's right. A small wrinkle is that you might even be able to use the
>> F12 installer images, but point to rawhide as your install source and
>> then you would install all the rawhide packages directly skipping the
>> update step.
> How will Anaconda get tested if the version in Rawhide is never used?
I think what Jesse (and whomever else) is saying, is when anaconda is
ready for testing, something will be done so that it can. Otherwise, it
will be getting worked on and they (the anaconda developers) will know
what the status is already on their own. I'm sure they know what it's
status is most of the time and when they need to find out something or
need more eyes, then we will get to try it and keep them informed.
Reading the anaconda list, I see a very large number of changes coming
down the road, all significant and probably as complex as the storage
rewrite. I bet the anaconda developers would appreciate the widest
possible testing as soon as changes hit rawhide.
If rawhide is to be frozen, can a mechanism to test anaconda, at a
minimum, be provided? Testing the rest of rawhide is easy and has been
Thanks, from a cheerful anaconda tester who may now be tearful.