Default image target size [Was:Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2012-06-18)]
awilliam at redhat.com
Tue Jun 19 22:45:30 UTC 2012
On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 22:33 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 06/19/2012 10:19 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >> Basically the plan was to reach out for example to the
> >> >Gnome/KDE/XFCE/LXDE/Sugar community's to ask for assistant to cover
> >> >their relevant part of required testing if that was the case.
> >> >
> >> >If you think about it who are better qualified and more willing to test
> >> >those components other then the people that are using it on daily bases...
> > This is fine in theory, but it doesn't hold up terribly well in
> > practice. Just about every time we roll a TC/RC, I mail the lists for
> > each desktop - GNOME, KDE, Xfce, LXDE, and Sugar - and ask for help in
> > filling out the validation matrix. We get help fairly often for GNOME
> > and KDE, and satellit_ usually covers Sugar, but we very rarely get
> > anything for Xfce or LXDE.
> Oh I'm pretty sure our solution works as well on paper as it does on the
> What's happening in the XFCE/LXDE community's is that the head of those
> SIG's aren't doing a great job of mobilizing their community to increase
> activities and participation in them which means that we ( QA ) might
> have to step up and be more visible in those community ( that is if they
> cant increase more activities in them ).
I'm not entirely sure your perception of these 'communities' is
accurate. The LXDE list had one mail in the entirety of May, for
instance. (It's had a staggering four so far this month).
Xfce is substantially more active, and we might have more success in
getting testing if we make a stronger effort there, I guess. But I am
not sure the Fedora LXDE 'community' is strong enough that we can
reasonably expect contributed testing on a regular basis.
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
More information about the devel