On 09/30/2014 11:38 PM, Mike Ruckman wrote: > Hello fellow Fedorans! I told cloud@ that I would work on some criteria to go > over, and here's what I have so far. These are pretty rough, but I think > they're servicable enough for the time being. There are only two I've thought > of for Beta, but I'm probably forgetting something. Patches welcome :) Here > they are: > === Growroot === > > Release blocking cloud images must be able to automatically utilize all > available space on a supported volume. > [Supported Volume?] > -> PVM, HVM volumes, basically, growroot should work without breaking on both > types of volumes. +1 > === Cloud-init === > > The cloud-init package must be functional for release blocking cloud images. > [Functional?] > -> the provided cloud-init package needs to work, but we won't block > on issues that EC2 or Openstack have with their service providing > said meta-data. +1 > Looking through the existing criteria we either need to update the existing > pages, create a cloud criteria page or be willing to handwave away criteria > that don't apply (for instance, GUI updates don't apply to cloud images). I'm > fine with the handwavy answer - I don't know that codifying every detail in the > wiki actually adds any value. > > That being said, there were some general edits I would make to the current beta > criteria: > > ----- Clarifications ----- > > * Define "supported configurations" in the "Release-blocking images must boot" > criteria to include all of the products. > > * Note that cloud installations don't need to be able to upgraded from release > to release (this might be wrong though) So, basically, we're taking a stand here and saying "don't treat your cattle like pets"? I'm OK with this, totally, just want to be clear. > * I would alter the "Shutdown, reboot, logout" criteria say "system" instead of > "desktop" since I'm sure all products want to be able to do all those things. +1 > Currently, that's all the input I have for the current release criteria. Each > of the new criteria would require new Testcases to be written. If anyone has any > feedback on any of these, it would be appreciated. Like Adam said in his Server > proposal, it would be good to get these taken care of ASAP as we have a TC > landing sometime tonight (I know, I know, it's a little late - but I think these > criteria fit the *intent* everyone has had so far). > > Any feedback would be great! Thanks! This all looks good to me. I do have the feeling that there's probably more we should have here, but it's not leaping to mind what. Best, jzb -- Joe Brockmeier | Principal Cloud & Storage Analyst jzb@xxxxxxxxxx | http://community.redhat.com/ Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
