Hey, folks. So, currently the Beta criteria state:
"The installer must be able to use all kickstart delivery methods"
This is probably over-ambitious for Beta. We have some pretty odd kickstart delivery methods:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_File_Path_Ks_Cfg https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_Hd_Device_Path_Ks_Cfg
that are only really useful in pretty unusual scenarios. In fact the first of these is broken in F16 Beta and we decided to go ahead and release it anyway (on the basis that we agreed this criterion should be changed, which is why I'm proposing a change now), and the world has not ended.
I'd propose at least this much change:
for Beta, the criterion should read
"The installer must be able to use the HTTP and NFS kickstart delivery methods"
as those are the two that are really useful in most situations, and we move
"The installer must be able to use all kickstart delivery methods"
to be a Final criterion. Thoughts? The Beta criterion is a bit more 'technology-specific' than I usually like to make the criteria, but I don't think we're that likely to discover any exciting new protocols in the foreseeable future, so specifying HTTP and NFS is probably reasonably future-proof.
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 19:44, Adam Williamson awilliam@redhat.com wrote:
Hey, folks. So, currently the Beta criteria state:
"The installer must be able to use all kickstart delivery methods"
This is probably over-ambitious for Beta. We have some pretty odd kickstart delivery methods:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_File_Path_Ks_Cfg https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_Hd_Device_Path_Ks_Cfg
that are only really useful in pretty unusual scenarios. In fact the first of these is broken in F16 Beta and we decided to go ahead and release it anyway (on the basis that we agreed this criterion should be changed, which is why I'm proposing a change now), and the world has not ended.
I'd propose at least this much change:
for Beta, the criterion should read
"The installer must be able to use the HTTP and NFS kickstart delivery methods"
as those are the two that are really useful in most situations, and we move
"The installer must be able to use all kickstart delivery methods"
to be a Final criterion. Thoughts? The Beta criterion is a bit more 'technology-specific' than I usually like to make the criteria, but I
For those of us not up on all the methods these days.. what are they (and which one didn't work for Beta :)) The reason I ask is if one of the methods is via UUCP .. I don't think even Final is really something we could care about :).
On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 20:05 -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 19:44, Adam Williamson awilliam@redhat.com wrote:
Hey, folks. So, currently the Beta criteria state:
"The installer must be able to use all kickstart delivery methods"
This is probably over-ambitious for Beta. We have some pretty odd kickstart delivery methods:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_File_Path_Ks_Cfg https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_Hd_Device_Path_Ks_Cfg
that are only really useful in pretty unusual scenarios. In fact the first of these is broken in F16 Beta and we decided to go ahead and release it anyway (on the basis that we agreed this criterion should be changed, which is why I'm proposing a change now), and the world has not ended.
I'd propose at least this much change:
for Beta, the criterion should read
"The installer must be able to use the HTTP and NFS kickstart delivery methods"
as those are the two that are really useful in most situations, and we move
"The installer must be able to use all kickstart delivery methods"
to be a Final criterion. Thoughts? The Beta criterion is a bit more 'technology-specific' than I usually like to make the criteria, but I
For those of us not up on all the methods these days.. what are they (and which one didn't work for Beta :)) The reason I ask is if one of the methods is via UUCP .. I don't think even Final is really something we could care about :).
I linked the two weirder ones in my post. The more common ones are just to retrieve the ks from an NFS server or HTTP server.
On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 18:44 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
Hey, folks. So, currently the Beta criteria state:
"The installer must be able to use all kickstart delivery methods"
This is probably over-ambitious for Beta. We have some pretty odd kickstart delivery methods:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_File_Path_Ks_Cfg https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_Hd_Device_Path_Ks_Cfg
that are only really useful in pretty unusual scenarios. In fact the first of these is broken in F16 Beta and we decided to go ahead and release it anyway (on the basis that we agreed this criterion should be changed, which is why I'm proposing a change now), and the world has not ended.
I'd propose at least this much change:
for Beta, the criterion should read
"The installer must be able to use the HTTP and NFS kickstart delivery methods"
as those are the two that are really useful in most situations, and we move
"The installer must be able to use all kickstart delivery methods"
to be a Final criterion. Thoughts? The Beta criterion is a bit more 'technology-specific' than I usually like to make the criteria, but I don't think we're that likely to discover any exciting new protocols in the foreseeable future, so specifying HTTP and NFS is probably reasonably future-proof.
Ping on this one: any further thoughts? Didn't get much response the first time out.
On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 18:44 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
Hey, folks. So, currently the Beta criteria state:
"The installer must be able to use all kickstart delivery methods"
This is probably over-ambitious for Beta. We have some pretty odd kickstart delivery methods:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_File_Path_Ks_Cfg https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_Hd_Device_Path_Ks_Cfg
that are only really useful in pretty unusual scenarios. In fact the first of these is broken in F16 Beta and we decided to go ahead and release it anyway (on the basis that we agreed this criterion should be changed, which is why I'm proposing a change now), and the world has not ended.
I'd propose at least this much change:
for Beta, the criterion should read
"The installer must be able to use the HTTP and NFS kickstart delivery methods"
as those are the two that are really useful in most situations, and we move
"The installer must be able to use all kickstart delivery methods"
to be a Final criterion. Thoughts? The Beta criterion is a bit more 'technology-specific' than I usually like to make the criteria, but I don't think we're that likely to discover any exciting new protocols in the foreseeable future, so specifying HTTP and NFS is probably reasonably future-proof.
Ping on this one: any further thoughts? Didn't get much response the first time out.
I agree.
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 08:44:52 -0500 From: kparal@redhat.com To: test@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Release criteria proposal: downgrade some kickstart delivery methods from Beta to Final
On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 18:44 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
Hey, folks. So, currently the Beta criteria state:
"The installer must be able to use all kickstart delivery methods"
This is probably over-ambitious for Beta. We have some pretty odd kickstart delivery methods:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_File_Path_Ks_Cfg https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_Hd_Device_Path_Ks_Cfg
that are only really useful in pretty unusual scenarios. In fact the first of these is broken in F16 Beta and we decided to go ahead and release it anyway (on the basis that we agreed this criterion should be changed, which is why I'm proposing a change now), and the world has not ended.
I'd propose at least this much change:
for Beta, the criterion should read
"The installer must be able to use the HTTP and NFS kickstart delivery methods"
as those are the two that are really useful in most situations, and we move
"The installer must be able to use all kickstart delivery methods"
to be a Final criterion. Thoughts? The Beta criterion is a bit more 'technology-specific' than I usually like to make the criteria, but I don't think we're that likely to discover any exciting new protocols in the foreseeable future, so specifying HTTP and NFS is probably reasonably future-proof.
Ping on this one: any further thoughts? Didn't get much response the first time out.
I agree.
I'm also +1 on this.
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 10:07 PM, Adam Williamson awilliam@redhat.com wrote:
Ping on this one: any further thoughts? Didn't get much response the first time out.
+1 from me.
-- Jared Smith Fedora Project Leader