Installation interfaces criterion proposal

[Adam Williamson]

On Wed, 2012-03-07 at 08:21 -0500, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > Because there are some objections for serial interface being in final
> > criterion, I'd like to start discussion again. There was discussion
> > on
> > blocker bug meeting [1] (17:40) and it didn't end with unanimous
> > decision. So, let the flame war begin. Do you want serial interface
> > in
> > beta criterion? I asked anaconda team for suggestion and here is
> > their
> > answer [2]. What is your opinion?
> > 
> > [1] http://goo.gl/921Vo
> > [2]
> > https://www.redhat.com/archives/anaconda-devel-list/2012-February/msg00144.html
> 
> My view is that having it Final is easier and having it Beta is more
> beneficial. Serial console is used a lot for various VM setups and
> automated testing. If we have it in Final, we might not get as much
> bug reports received from general public, because in Beta it will be
> broken.
> 
> The QA team uses TCs and RCs, but still, this issue might get fixed
> just soon before Final if the requirement is Final. That makes all
> tests based on serial console useless, because they will pass only at
> the end of development cycle. Here's an example of such a test:
> http://autoqa-stg.fedoraproject.org/resultsdb/frontend/search?type=Testcase&terms=rats_install
> 
> So it hurts both us and the bug reports from public. I don't know how
> hard is to maintain serial console for Anaconda team. Maybe it's a
> nightmare. But if it is doable, I would prefer having it in Beta.

I think that's pretty strong reasoning, and it makes me lean towards
Beta as well.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net