Possible new release criterion: installation boot menu

James Laska jlaska at redhat.com
Fri Jul 16 18:47:06 UTC 2010

On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 11:33 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 14:16 -0400, James Laska wrote:
> > > Alpha: when booting a traditional installer image, the boot sequence
> > > should be such that the system boots into the installer (after a
> > > reasonable timeout for any optional user input, if appropriate) without
> > > the need for any user input.
> > > 
> > > Beta: the graphical boot menu must appear as intended.
> > > 
> > > What does everyone think would be best here? One of the above, or some
> > > other option? Thanks!
> > 
> > Just to add some visual exhibits ... see the attachments to compare
> > rawhide and Fedora 13 boot dialogs.
> > 
> > I was going to suggest the criteria around the timout, but you've
> > already suggested that above.  I think that's a nice touch.
> > 
> > Is there a large technical challenge that requires splitting the boot
> > criteria in two?  I'm not opposed to it, but I'm not sure if it's an
> > artificial division, or if there are really cases that demand the split.
> > If we can require that the boot media be setup correctly at the Alpha, 
> I was just trying to cover the possibilities. For me, the appearance of
> a graphical menu is really a polish issue and doesn't fit well with
> Alpha, it seems more suited to Beta or Final. But the practical element
> is whether the boot-to-the-installer process actually works, no matter
> what you see in the meantime. For me the loss of the other options on
> the menu isn't really critical until beta, but the install process
> should at least start if you just boot and wait at Alpha stage.
> It may be too much effort to draw this distinction, though, in which
> case we may as well go with #1.

Yeah, definitely #1.

> > Another thought, I recall there was some debate about adding release
> > criteria for the artwork.  Would it make sense to rephrase the second
> > point to something more specific to Fedora artwork? [1]
> For me that's *definitely* a final release polish issue. I don't think
> we can really say we want to delay the Alpha or even Beta release simply
> for an old wallpaper on the bootloader menu, can we?

No, I wouldn't argue this as a Alpha (or possibly Beta) criteria.  I
only meant to suggest that it could be combined with something more
generic about artwork for the release.  Like you point out above, it
feels more like a polish issue.  Much like many of the artwork issues
(not meant to diminish their contribution, only that they are not
required for proper function).


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/attachments/20100716/ebe64c2d/attachment.bin 

More information about the test mailing list