[Fedora-spins] Proposal: Spins process amendment for Fedora 20 cycle

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Fri, 05 Jul 2013 13:18:49 -0700
Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com> wrote:

...snip...

> We already have test cases for all of these. No need for new ones.

ok. How can we denote the ones we desire tested for these? 

Basic Desktop?
 
> > At the Alpha milestone, all approved spins will be created by
> > rel-eng.
> > 
> > Each approved spin MUST have at least 2 people fill in the Basic
> > spin test matrix for at least 1 TC or RC. If the image fails,
> > maintainers can try again at the next milestone, but the image is
> > NOT shipped for that milestone. if an image doesn't get 2 people
> > filling in Basic spin tests, the image is dropped for that cycle
> > and IS NOT SHIPPED FOR THAT RELEASE! Such images can be reapproved
> > by the spins sig for the next cycle.
> 
> I think this is going way too far.

ok. 

> Specifically: I think *one* test for each spin is more realistic. I 
> don't think we need to block spins for being oversize, or for SELinux 
> denials. They're spins. I don't think we can overreach on quality 
> requirements.
> 
> > - Is 2 people too many? Should it just be 1? or More?
> 
> See above.

Fair enough. If thats the consensus, thats ok with me. 
 
> > - Are there other Basic tests we should require?
> 
> No. That's actually all we require from the *release blocking* live 
> images at Alpha.
> 
> > - Is there a better way to track things than that wiki page?
> 
> Not at present, no. WikiTCMS isn't so bad once you get used to it.

Right. 

kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/attachments/20130706/c54484af/attachment.sig>