FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-05-2010, 02:39 PM
Adam Williamson
 
Default Fedora 13 Alpha Go/No-Go Meeting: 2010-03-04 @ 01:00 UTC Recap

On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 05:31 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > We have various different definitions of the Alpha, it seems. The
> > working definition that QA / rel-eng have always worked on when deciding
> > whether to ship it is, broadly, 'can you install it, boot it, get a
> > network connection, and install updates'. That's what the current Alpha
> > release criteria and validation tests aim to explicitly codify and
> > verify.
>
> But it also fails that definition and this was ignored just because it
> didn't happen in the GNOME spin (which will always be the GNOME spin, not
> the "desktop spin", but *A* desktop spin; FESCo, the Board or any other
> committee deciding otherwise doesn't change this, it's like deciding that
> apples are "fruit" and any other fruit can only be an "orange fruit", a
> "pear fruit" etc., but not a "fruit" because only apples are that). :-/

Please stop making the same point five times, I'm reluctant to reply to
you because I don't want to repeat myself all over the place.

I already explained this, multiple times, on email and IRC. I'm sorry
you're not happy with the explanation, but saying so again and again and
again isn't getting us anywhere.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-05-2010, 02:39 PM
Adam Williamson
 
Default Fedora 13 Alpha Go/No-Go Meeting: 2010-03-04 @ 01:00 UTC Recap

On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 05:32 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 15:53 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> >> We should change or refine the Freeze Policy page then. Having different
> >> definitions of what is required for alpha to go out and what can go in
> >> after alpha leads to incorrect expectations on the part of developers.
> >
> > I agree. I think probably all we need to do is remove the weasel-word
> > 'testable' and give a more solid definition there.
>
> Well, the Freeze Policy page is about targets feature owners should meet,
> not about Alpha blockers.

Sure, but 'testable' is equally meaningless in both contexts.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-05-2010, 08:20 PM
Adam Miller
 
Default Fedora 13 Alpha Go/No-Go Meeting: 2010-03-04 @ 01:00 UTC Recap

On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 10:31 PM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@chello.at> wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
>> We have various different definitions of the Alpha, it seems. The
>> working definition that QA / rel-eng have always worked on when deciding
>> whether to ship it is, broadly, 'can you install it, boot it, get a
>> network connection, and install updates'. That's what the current Alpha
>> release criteria and validation tests aim to explicitly codify and
>> verify.
>
> But it also fails that definition and this was ignored just because it
> didn't happen in the GNOME spin (which will always be the GNOME spin, not
> the "desktop spin", but *A* desktop spin; FESCo, the Board or any other
> committee deciding otherwise doesn't change this, it's like deciding that
> apples are "fruit" and any other fruit can only be an "orange fruit", a
> "pear fruit" etc., but not a "fruit" because only apples are that). :-/
>
> * * * *Kevin Kofler
>
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

I apologize in advance to all those who this might offend.

Kevin, please stop being such an ass all the time. I mean really, just
give it a rest. We get it, you *love* KDE and that's awesome but just
because its not everyone's preference doesn't mean everyone is out to
take KDE down.

Maybe take some of this energy you spend starting Gnome vs. KDE flame
wars (or trying to at least) and get more people involved in the KDE
SIG. Get contributors interested and make then want to help contribute
towards making the KDE experience in Fedora the best it can possibly
be.

-AdamM

--
http://maxamillion.googlepages.com
---------------------------------------------------------
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-07-2010, 03:16 AM
Rakesh Pandit
 
Default Fedora 13 Alpha Go/No-Go Meeting: 2010-03-04 @ 01:00 UTC Recap

On 6 March 2010 02:50, Adam Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 10:31 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> We have various different definitions of the Alpha, it seems. The
>>> working definition that QA / rel-eng have always worked on when deciding
>>> whether to ship it is, broadly, 'can you install it, boot it, get a
>>> network connection, and install updates'. That's what the current Alpha
>>> release criteria and validation tests aim to explicitly codify and
>>> verify.
>>
>> But it also fails that definition and this was ignored just because it
>> didn't happen in the GNOME spin (which will always be the GNOME spin, not
>> the "desktop spin", but *A* desktop spin; FESCo, the Board or any other
>> committee deciding otherwise doesn't change this, it's like deciding that
>> apples are "fruit" and any other fruit can only be an "orange fruit", a
>> "pear fruit" etc., but not a "fruit" because only apples are that). :-/
>>
[..]
>
> I apologize in advance to all those who this might offend.
>
> Kevin, please stop being such an ass all the time. I mean really, just

Even though polite suggestions and pointers about discussions going
away from topic are welcome, but please refrain for using
inappropriate words (apologizing beforehand does not make it better).

> give it a rest. We get it, you *love* KDE and that's awesome but just
> because its not everyone's preference doesn't mean everyone is out to
> take KDE down.
>
> Maybe take some of this energy you spend starting Gnome vs. KDE flame
> wars (or trying to at least) and get more people involved in the KDE
> SIG. Get contributors interested and make then want to help contribute
> towards making the KDE experience in Fedora the best it can possibly
> be.
>
[..]

--
Rakesh Pandit
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rakesh
freedom, friends, features, first
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:52 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org