On December 15, 2016 9:32:36 PM PST, Kevin Kofler
>Kamil Paral wrote:
>> - Nobody argued for KDE Live. We probably don't bulk press KDE Live
>> If we cover Workstation Live, it's improbable that only KDE Live
>> break, but not impossible. If such thing happens, are people OK with
>> releasing Fedora XX KDE Live only bootable over USB?
>Yet another step towards making Fedora KDE a second-class citizen. :-(
>Either we continue supporting DVD media for all spins/editions or for
Why all-or-nothing approach? My original proposal talks about 'all' being quite
time consuming and probably losing the "worth the time" ratio quickly. But
isn't "something" better than "nothing"? That's exactly what
we're talking about here - having a set of "guaranteed to be working" media,
ideally those generic enough to be widely usable (KDE can be installed from netinst, even
if KDE Live doesn't boot from a spinning disc), or those mostly used in this scenario
(that would be Workstation Live).
> Kevin Kofler
>devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
I don't see why we can't just say the requirement is that we test "at least
one release blocking live image". I can't see any reason we have to specify
which one we test.
Which images we test and how often is an internal QA process that we can decide ourselves
according to our resources. But I'm trying to figure out here on which images we
*block*. "At least one Live image" is probably something people wouldn't
like if KDE turned out to be working and Workstation not (in terms of optical boot). And I
don't want to belittle KDE here, but Workstation is the main face of Fedora (at least
by looking at getfedora.org
, and reading the reviews).