On Thu, 2022-05-05 at 12:16 +0100, Allan Day wrote: > Long thread here! I'm not going to pretend to have properly read all of it. :) > > Some key points from my side: > > 1. When the workstation working group discussed this issue earlier in > the week, the consensus was that the bugs we've seen for contacts, > calendar and photos shouldn't block the release. We don't expect to be > able to quickly fix them, and we don't expect them to be widely > encountered. Please let's not delay on those! BTW, I should maybe correct what I view as a potential misconception here: F36 has not at any point *actually* been delayed by one of these GNOME desktop app blockers. At every point we've slipped, it's been for something else. On 04-13, we had a whole ton of blockers in all sorts of things still lying around (and hadn't yet found these bugs at all). On 04-20, we had some selinux bugs that were still shaking out, and https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073708 . On 04-28, we had most of the desktop bugs identified and we accepted a couple as blockers, but my intent at the start of that day was that if these late-discovered desktop blockers were the *only* blockers remaining, I would propose waiving them, and I expected strong support for that proposal. However, on that day and during that meeting, it became apparent that https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072070 was much worse than we had previously thought, and it was accepted as a blocker with a strong sentiment of "...and we can't waive that we actually need to fix it". So I would say *that* is the bug we slipped for on 04-28, not any of the desktop app bugs. I do think it's worth having this discussion, because any time we waive or intend to waive a blocker, it's reasonable to consider what led us to having to make that decision and see if we can improve it. But I don't think we should have this discussion under the impression that we actually delayed Fedora 36 for weeks because of late-discovered GNOME app bugs; we did not. > > 2. I've set in motion a process to review the state of contacts, > calendar and photos, with a view to establishing whether they should > be preinstalled, and what the quality level is like. That will target > F37. Thanks a lot for this. > > 3. The workstation WG will also try and come back with a view on how > the release criteria should be adjusted for the preinstalled app set. Also thanks for this, we'll look forward to receiving and considering it. > > 4. The feedback from QA in this thread has been super helpful, and I'm > sure we'll feed that information into future decisions. More feedback > and discussion would be great. Maybe we could come to an agreement > over what it's realistic to expect from QA in terms of app testing, > for example, and use that information to inform the overall scope of > the preinstalled app set. A dedicated meeting to discuss desktop QA > seems like a good idea to me. Sure, we'd be on board for this. > > My general feeling is that there's probably more common ground on this > issue than the thread may suggest. Personally speaking, the quality of > our desktop apps has been a longstanding concern which I've devoted a > lot of time and thought to, and the idea of reducing the scope of the > preinstalled app set while simultaneously increasing quality is one > that I would generally support. I think the main question is how to do > that within the constraints of a) users and b) contributor > communities. Oh yeah, I agree - I think we're all kind of poking at the same animal from different sides, I don't think there's a fundamental disagreement exactly. It's just a case of figuring out all the different angles on it so we can come up with the most appropriate course of action to improve things in future. > > Having a session on QA at GUADEC seems like a great idea too! Sounds great, but I don't think anyone from our team will be there :| I am going to be at Devconf.us in Boston in August, if anyone from desktop team can be there. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha https://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ desktop mailing list -- desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to desktop-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
