Release criteria proposal: logging

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 16:47 -0400, James Laska wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 13:44 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > I know there's a bit of a backlog of proposed criteria changes I really
> > should look at, but wanted to write this one down before it escapes. Per
> > the thread 'Syslog not running?', I'd like to propose the following
> > Alpha criterion for future releases:
> > 
> > * A system logging infrastructure must be available, enabled by default,
> > and must work as intended, and in accordance with relevant standards
> > accepted by the Project
> > 
> > (Improvements to the wording welcome, I'm trying to keep it from going
> > stale by not specifying particular logger implementations or file
> > locations)
> 
> ACK! :)  
> 
> My usual concerns about encompassing too much ... should we elaborate on
> "working as intended"?  Clearly we are interested in whether it works in
> the most basic sense ... not if remote logging a select set of messages
> to another system fails (or is that included too)?

No, I think basic local logging is all we're interested in. Revision:

* A system logging infrastructure must be available and enabled by
default. It must provide at least basic local file-based logging of
kernel messages, and allow other components to write log messages. This
must be done in accordance with relevant standards accepted by the
Project

better?
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net