Draft: compendium image validation testing matrix

[Kamil Paral]

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_QA_Compendium_image_validation_results_template#Boot_and_sub-image_selection
> 
> so 'multi_auto' would just be 'leave it, and check it does the right
> thing', 'multi_manual' would be a test case that's something like
> 'try
> every entry besides basic video / memtest / local boot and make sure
> they respond appropriately', and the other three are obvious - we
> probably don't really need to do those three on both arches, we could
> split out a small table for those, I guess.

This table is pretty neat.

One thing though: I find "Multi-Live" and "Multi-DVD" names more straightforward than "Multi-Desktop" and "Multi-Install" (this one takes me a while to decipher). But that might be my personal feeling only.

> 
> The multi_sub_boot test now becomes redundant, 

Yes, that's not needed now.

> and I suppose we could
> move sub_install up into this new big table; we can probably get away
> without testing install of every DE, since they all use anaconda. 
> The case I can see where install might break on the compendium images is
> the
> case where anaconda, for whatever reason, examines the actual medium
> it's booting from. It _does_ do this, in some cases - like it tries
> to
> except the USB stick it's booting from (if it is) from the target
> device
> list. (This test may well not work on the compendium images,
> actually).
> I can possibly imagine a case where anaconda goes to look what image
> it's booting from, and gets confused if it's the compendium disc. But
> that shouldn't vary between desktops.

I see it the same way. That means multi_sub_install (or maybe just multi_install now) can be merged into the previous table.