On 17 June 2014 18:35, Adam Williamson <email@example.com> wrote:
On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 17:48 -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:Well, that would be pointless. We're building a new product, called
> On 17 June 2014 16:02, Adam Williamson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > I've revised the release criteria draft again, with reference to the
> > useful discussions both on-list and at this morning's meeting:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_server_release_criteria
> > I added the firewall exception for the Cockpit web interface, clarified
> > the issue about role deployment "at install time", and added new
> > criteria for the cockpit management interface to be running OOTB and for
> > roles to meet their "functional requirements, as defined in their role
> > specification documents" - role specification documents being something
> > I invented out of my ass at the meeting this morning. View that one as a
> > trial balloon. :)
> > As always, thoughts / comments welcome!
> OK. First of all, where could I 'test' any of these things on a Fedora 20
Fedora Server. That's kind of the whole point. We already have release
criteria that are more or less scope-appropriate for the product called
"Fedora 20" - they're the Fedora 20 Release Criteria, which we used to
validate the Fedora 20 release.
That is not what I meant. I am sorry I am not communicating well and not being helpful here. I have seen the links and such but they are in the words on a white board. There are ~60 days before the alpha+2 weeks and I wanted to see what code was written and possibly set it up against Fed 20 (as Fedora 21/Rawhide may not be the best to test against as its changing) so I could see if the draft looked spot on or if it was too little or too much. That was all.