On Tue, 2022-09-13 at 09:00 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
I would make the criterion a little more generic than that. E.g. we
don't want to block Fedora release if
https://extensions.gnome.org/
goes down due to a server problem, or if GNOME decides to change the
way extension installation works.
For the first part, we can add a footnote clarifying that we expect the
site to be working. For the second, if that happens, we can just change
the criterion. It's only text.
I'm not sure I can write it any more generically without losing all
meaning or unexpectedly broadening the scope. For instance if we just
say it must be possible to install extensions, what does that *mean*?
Is it OK if you can only do it by hacking around with gsettings values
manually? Or on the other end of the scale, does it require that *any
possible method* of installing extensions works? That just feels too
vague to me.
Do you have a suggestion for improved wording?
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net