Criterion revision proposal: KDE default applications

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2013-12-12 at 20:30 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-12-12 at 21:12 -0500, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > Really?  We don't want to even make sure the apps that we ship by
> > default in the DVD image starts?  Why are we even bothering to ship
> > those additional apps then? Include in the DVD image the same set of
> > apps that we include in the live images (from GNOME and KDE) and
> > nothing more then.
> 
> My $0.02: I'm surprised this change is even being considered. If the
> application is completely broken, and it is not important enough to be
> on the live CD, and it is not important enough to fix before the
> release, then the application should be dropped from the default
> install: blocker resolved! If it's important enough to remain in the
> default install, it's also important enough to block the release.
> 
> A basic functionality test is, well, basic, and Fedora shouldn't install
> something by default that's known to be completely broken. It also
> doesn't make any sense for a DVD installation to secretly result in a
> lower quality desktop than a live CD installation. (Well, it doesn't
> really make sense for the DVD installation to include more packages,
> either, but that's a separate issue.)

It never turns out to be quite so simple in practice.

The specific bug here is:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1040922

it was -1'ed at go/no-go meeting in about five seconds. No-one voted +1
blocker on it. We are clearly not, as a project, willing to block
releases on this. Yet it clearly violates the current criterion as
written. This must be resolved somehow.

The complicating factors here: the 'application' in question isn't
really an application so much as it's a convenience wrapper around one
of the dozens of bits that go to make up kipi-plugins. It's not actually
totally broken, because if you somehow run it against some image files -
run it from a command line, or use it to 'open with' some image file or
other - it works.

It doesn't do anyone any good for us to write something in our criteria
that the project is not actually willing to stick to; in practice, this
criterion is not passing the 'do we slip a week to fix absolutely any
violation of this criterion' test. We don't. So, we have to do something
about that.

Please do post any alternative suggestions that resolve the tension...
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net