Request: please consider clarifying the project's position on Spins

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2010-12-02 at 10:10 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 09:12:29AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > 
> > I do also agree with Jaroslav's distinction between different types of
> > spin; from my area of interest, desktop spins inherently benefit more
> > from the QA process because of what they do. The Electronics Lab spin,
> > for instance, doesn't present a vastly different appearance out of the
> > box than the Desktop spin - it's just a different selection of apps. Our
> > testing process mostly concerns itself with stuff like 'does it boot, do
> > basic operations work' which wouldn't actually differ much between the
> > Desktop spin and the Electronics Lab spin - but certainly *do* differ
> > between desktop and KDE, or desktop and LXDE. It would be difficult for
> > us to mess things up such that the desktop spin fundamentally 'works'
> > but the electronics lab spin doesn't, but we certainly can mess things
> > up such that the desktop spin works but the LXDE spin doesn't (we've
> > done it before).
> >
> Although, thinking of target audience for the spin, FEL could certainly
> benefit from a different kind of testing.  Whereas the desktop spins need to
> boot and be able to yum update, FEL is one part demonstration as well -- so
> the programs that are being highlighted specially as being on the media
> should work out of the box as well.

true, and that's *definitely* a case where it makes most sense for the
SIG to do the testing (as they're the ones who know what the heck should
happen :>)
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net