On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 02:32:34AM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 12:02:09PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Matthew Miller > > <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 05:51:02PM +0200, Jiri Eischmann wrote: > > >> conversation with Kamil Paral today: > > >> Wayland has not been proposed as a change for Fedora 25 and no one > > >> outside the workstation group knows it's still a plan unless they > > >> follow our mailing list closely. > > >> Fedora QA doesn't test Wayland, Wayland test cases are not part of test > > >> matrices and so forth. > > >> Now for the rest of the Fedora Project we're going with X11 for F25 and > > >> Wayland is still just the experimental thingy. To make it default it > > >> needs to go through thorough testing by the QA team and it needs to be > > >> part of test matrices. > > > > > > We really _do_ need to go through the proper process here. Please > > > remember, Fedora is a huge project with hundreds of active > > > contributors, and this isn't just mere bureaucracy. We require the > > > coordination in order to continue to produce the reoccuring miracle > > > that is a functioning Fedora release. > > > > > > I'm excited as anyone for the new features and improvements Wayland > > > brings to the table, but let's do it right. > > > > If someone wants to file a FESCo ticket to get it approved as a late > > change, I think that's reasonable. But tomorrow is go/no-go and I > > think it's at least as risky to flip back to Xorg by default as it is > > to leave Wayland the default; and no doubt FESCo would take QA's > > opinion on the late change into account but this lateness I think is > > pretty minor compared to some of the late changes that have happened > > in the past. > > > > I think a case can be made that it was always intended to be the > > default for Fedora 25, it very nearly was the default for Fedora 24. > > It's something of an oversight there was no change filed for Fedora > > 25, and it just slipped through the crack. Unless testers are manually > > changing to Xorg, it is being tested since it's the enabled default, > > which is a requirement by the change process. It probably also is at > > or nearly at the 100% code complete point well before that deadline; > > and if it's not 100% then the WG can estimate how far away it is and > > how likely it'd be at 100% by that deadline. > > > > Top on my list of blocking behaviors for which I'm not aware of an > > appropriate release criterion is: by beta the switching between > > wayland and X needs to be bulletproof; in particular the ability to > > switch from Wayland to X must actually work and must stick through a > > reboot (persistence). As long as the user can reliably use X, I think > > the worst of Waylands maturation problems are surmountable. There is > > an in place fallback, it's not like pretty much all other system wide > > complex changes where there is no such user initiated fallback > > available. > > I don't think that this is an accurate description of current > situation. If testers who install F25 get wayland by default, all > this tells us that it mostly works, but not that it's ready for > widespread use. There's still a long list of open issues until feature > parity with X11. Those things don't get reported as bugs, because they > are well known missing features, not really bugs, but they cannot be > ignored. I've been using gnome-wayland myself for the last year, and > I think it's great, but there's still too many shortcomings. > > IMO, the only reasonable course of action at this point is to make > X11 the default for F25 and punt wayland on to F26. Is "feature parity with X11" the intended measure of readiness here? I thought there were specific X11 features that are intentionally not going to be duplicated in Wayland, which would make that a false bar to try to reach. We do have this existing feature page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/WaylandByDefault I was asked to propose this as a late feature for an exception. However, the page doesn't appear to be updated technically. Also, this test criterion seems suspect: "Use the desktop normally, and verify that there are no obvious instabilities, or Wayland-specific bugs or performance problems" "No Wayland-specific bugs" also doesn't appear to jibe with the desire to get Wayland out as a default even if there are a few specific bugs to solve. The page lists https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1277927 as a tracker, but I didn't think the objective is to fix/close all the bugs on that tracker in order to move to Wayland. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
