2012-10-08, 2012-10-15, 2012-10-22 - Fedora QA Meeting - recap

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 10/24/2012 06:15 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Right. I do wish you wouldn't exaggerate things, Johann. The criteria
> are a part of Fedora as a whole, they define what the project considers
> minimum acceptable functionality for each release point. They are not
> solely a QA issue, other teams clearly have input into the question.

we are the one who create the criteria
we are the ones that follow it
we are the ones that test if the relevant stuff meets the criteria

Yes developers and packagers might do mistakes but in the end it's we ( 
QA/Releng ) the ones that are ultimately responsible for the overall 
quality of the release
we are the last line of defense for the end user and we are the ones 
that should handle this ( from my pov. )

Asking the relevant developer group in this case Anaconda if they think 
we are setting *our* distribution criteria to high to meet their *own* 
software or even the group of individuals that approved the newUI 
feature accepted it and allowed it with no better contingency plan than 
what was given. An group of people that seem to be incapable of 
answering one simply question I have asked on numerous occasion when it 
became clear that the newUI installer is no way ready to be released to 
the general public. Why the rush? why not push it back a release to 
allow it to stabilize a bit more?

And so I quote yourself to FESCO...

"Additionally, RH has asked its staff on the anaconda team to prioritize 
work on a pending RHEL release over work on Fedora 18, and that is 
happening, which may further delay work on the upgrade tool and the 
current blocker list."

Yet another alarm bell ringing and where does this leave us ( the 
project ) with the installer?

So excuse me for being skeptical about FESCO decision making and an 
development group that no longer has the time to develop the 
distributions installer for showing concerns and "exaggerate things.

JBG