Proposed Cloud release criteria for F21

[Joe Brockmeier]

On 09/30/2014 11:38 PM, Mike Ruckman wrote:
> Hello fellow Fedorans! I told cloud@ that I would work on some criteria to go
> over, and here's what I have so far. These are pretty rough, but I think 
> they're servicable enough for the time being. There are only two I've thought
> of for Beta, but I'm probably forgetting something. Patches welcome :) Here 
> they are:

> === Growroot ===
> 
> Release blocking cloud images must be able to automatically utilize all 
> available space on a supported volume.
> [Supported Volume?]
>  -> PVM, HVM volumes, basically, growroot should work without breaking on both
>     types of volumes.

+1

> === Cloud-init ===
> 
> The cloud-init package must be functional for release blocking cloud images.
> [Functional?]
>  -> the provided cloud-init package needs to work, but we won't block
>     on issues that EC2 or Openstack have with their service providing
>     said meta-data.

+1

> Looking through the existing criteria we either need to update the existing 
> pages, create a cloud criteria page or be willing to handwave away criteria
> that don't apply (for instance, GUI updates don't apply to cloud images). I'm
> fine with the handwavy answer - I don't know that codifying every detail in the
> wiki actually adds any value.
> 
> That being said, there were some general edits I would make to the current beta
> criteria:
> 
> ----- Clarifications -----
> 
>  * Define "supported configurations" in the "Release-blocking images must boot" 
>    criteria to include all of the products.
> 
>  * Note that cloud installations don't need to be able to upgraded from release
>    to release (this might be wrong though)

So, basically, we're taking a stand here and saying "don't treat your
cattle like pets"? I'm OK with this, totally, just want to be clear.

>  * I would alter the "Shutdown, reboot, logout" criteria say "system" instead of
>    "desktop" since I'm sure all products want to be able to do all those things.

+1

> Currently, that's all the input I have for the current release criteria. Each
> of the new criteria would require new Testcases to be written. If anyone has any
> feedback on any of these, it would be appreciated. Like Adam said in his Server
> proposal, it would be good to get these taken care of ASAP as we have a TC
> landing sometime tonight (I know, I know, it's a little late - but I think these
> criteria fit the *intent* everyone has had so far).
> 
> Any feedback would be great! Thanks!

This all looks good to me. I do have the feeling that there's probably
more we should have here, but it's not leaping to mind what.

Best,

jzb

-- 
Joe Brockmeier | Principal Cloud & Storage Analyst
jzb at redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
Twitter: @jzb  | http://dissociatedpress.net/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/cloud/attachments/20141001/b8ad22e1/attachment.sig>