On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 03:21:53PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2015-02-05 at 11:24 -0700, Mike Ruckman wrote:
> Greetings testers!
>
> While looking into the affects of the yum/dnf migration I noticed
> some cleanup
> opportunities with the release criteria and thought I'd email the
> list before
> making any changes.
>
> Beta
> ====
>
> Package set selection
>
> Should we update this to say "when using any network install
> image..."
> instead of "when using the generic?" I'd add a note with something
> like,
> "[Any?] This means any of the productized network installation
> media and
> the base network installation image."
No. I only just wrote this, and it's specifically this way for a
reason. We're getting the generic netinst back for F22, and we only
want to 'officially support' package set selection when using that
image. The Product-ized netinsts are only 'officially supported' for
deploying their own package sets. At least, that's the current plan.
Ah, ok. I must've have missed that. So will the prodcutized netinsts not
even offer other package sets?
>
> Kickstart Delivery
>
> Not really a criterion change, but we still list a diskette as a
> supported
> delivery mechanism [0]. Should we remove this, or do we still
> actively test
> using a diskette for ks delivery?
Hum, not sure. I know I haven't had a floppy drive for like ten years
so it might be hard to test, but people do do a lot of really weird
stuff.
I think I might have a disk drive around here somewhere, but I don't
have disks any more (not even to use for coasters)...
> Updgrade Requirements
>
> This currently reads: "The release-blocking package sets are the
> minimal set,
> and the sets for each one of the release-blocking desktops."
>
> Should this be updated to "each one of the release-blocking
> products and
> release-blocking desktops?"
Probably, yeah. It's a bit wiggly either way, but I like that one
better...
> Domain controller role
>
> The note says this criteria should be removed after F21 - but
> since rolekit
> relies on yum to install the bits needed for the domain
> controller, should
> we keep this in place for F22 through the dnf migration?
It's supposed to be *moved* to a separate page, not just removed. I've
had that proposal in draft for a while now, I should probably just go
ahead and do it:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/server/2015-January/001719.html
Ah, that makes sense. I just wasn't sure from the wording on the
criteria pages themselves.
> Cloud-init
>
> This was an oversight on my part originally. We need to define the
> specific
> bits of cloud-init that need to work. It'd be nice and easy to
> just say,
> "all of them," but cloud-init has a yum module and no dnf module.
> We need
> to figure out what to do about cloud-init if dnf support won't be
> added.
And by 'we', we mean 'you' ;)
Yeah, already working on it with gholms. I'll work through it with the
Cloud WG.
--
// Mike
--
Fedora QA
freenode: roshi
http://roshi.fedorapeople.org