How to interpret F18 Blocker criterion

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 11/11/2012 04:31 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> We do, and that's a plausible outcome. But I think those pushing for a 
> stronger approach than this are making a decent case. It's at least 
> worth considering if our 'we don't care about VBox' stance may be 
> hurting more than we had thought, and considering making more of a 
> distinction between 'we don't care about using Fedora as a VBox host' 
> and 'we rather do care about making sure Fedora works as a VBox guest, 
> as best we can'. 

I think we need something like in the final criteria

"Fedora must successfully install,boot and establish a network 
connection running as a guest in hyperv/kvm/vbox/vmware/xen for each one 
of the release-blocking package sets ('minimal', and the package sets 
for each one of the release-blocking desktops)"
( this means #810040 will block the release )

maybe we should say with the virtualzation host default settings in the 
above?

And I think we need rewrite and or adjust this one which I simply fail 
to parse

"The release must boot successfully as Xen DomU with releases providing 
a functional, supported Xen Dom0 and widely used cloud providers 
utilizing Xen. This does not include any issues limited to the release 
functioning as Xen Dom0"

To something that covers both kvm and xen without referring to cloud 
specifically and be more generic which should cover that just fine.

"Fedora must successfully run as an kvm/xen virtualzation host"

Followed by test cases on how to setup and run Fedora as a one.

JBG