Criterion revision proposal: KDE default applications

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On fös 13.des 2013 06:30, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-12-13 at 05:31 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>> On fös 13.des 2013 02:05, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> It was clear at the Go/No-Go meeting today that KDE SIG does not
>>> consider this release criterion applicable/desired:
>>>
>>> "All applications that can be launched using the standard graphical
>>> mechanism of a release-blocking desktop after a default installation of
>>> that desktop must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality
>>> test."
>>>
>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_Final_Release_Criteria#Default_application_functionality
>>>
>>> jreznik says they consider the live image their 'polished product' where
>>> everything must work, while the DVD install is more of a grab-bag - they
>>> install a whole bunch of stuff, and don't think it's the end of the
>>> world if one or two bits are broken.
>>>
>>> Given that, I propose re-wording as follows:
>> You are trying to fix the problem on the wrong end thus leave the
>> criteria as is.
>>
>> The installing should not differ ( or in other word be consistent )
>> regardless if you install from the live or from the dvd the end result
>> should be the same.
>>
>> You should have the same service enablement, the same desktop instalment
>> and experience etc.
>>
>> So get releng to get their act together and fix that for the dvd so
>> matches with the live.
> Per my long reply on the other sub-thread, I'm fine with that if it
> actually _happens_. But it's not releng's responsibility; it's the KDE
> and desktop SIGs. They own this stuff: it's their responsibility to
> choose what packages go in the lives and what packages are deployed when
> you do a DVD install of their desktops.

The DVD is releng/fesco responsibility, they dictate and decide what's 
on it and what not and how it's delivered not the sub-community's.

There are other differences then just the package selection that get 
installed for example which services are enabled etc. compared to the lives.

I argue that we should get rid of the DVD it's an era of the past and 
just provide net-install iso and lives.

Those lives should be under full control of the sub-community both in 
terms of size,partitioning, filesystem layout.filesystem type, package 
selection as well as service enablement even to the use an alternative 
installer but those sub-community should also be responsible for QA-ing 
( testing/triaging  ) as well as the necessary release engineering work 
to release their own lives..

JBG