Release criteria notes

[Adam Williamson]

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.

> 
> 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.

> 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

> 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' ;)

> Role installation
> 
>   For at least F22, do we need to have a criterion for installing 
> new roles
>   with rolekit? Or will "brought to a working configuration" cover 
> this enough?

It might be worth explicitly covering that, yeah, I'll look at it when 
I come back to the role criteria change.

> Final
> =====
> 
> Domain controller role
> 
>   As with the beta, I'd suggest we keep this through F22 to make 
> sure things
>   work.

Ditto Beta, it's not supposed to just 'disappear', it's just a 
rearrangement so we don't wind up with the criteria stuffed with 
requirements for X different server roles when we have more.

> I know herding the Release Criteria is typically an Adam thing, 

It's not! Please! I would love if I never had to touch a release 
criterion again! Please, more people work on them! What do I have to 
do to get rid of this perception :P

I work on them because *someone* has to do it, but the more other 
folks want to step in with ideas, the better...
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net