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