On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 13:47 -0500, Genes MailLists wrote: > On 11/22/2010 01:35 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 13:23 -0500, Genes MailLists wrote: > > > >> * A major version should be imposed every 6 months if it > >> has not for some reason. > > > > Why? Your idea of tying version bumps to actual changes in the product > > rather than an arbitrary timeline is an interesting one, but then having > > a backstop forced version bump every six months even if there is no > > relevant change completely undercuts the idea. > > > Good point ... was thinking it was a way to ensure anaconda keeps > pace but you're right ... it should follow the actual changes ... > > Do you have any suggestions how to manage ensuring that each ISO > snapshot has a working anaconda ? This is the kind of thing automated testing would help a lot with; we already have some automated testing of anaconda in place, but it doesn't cover many paths, only the most basic - essentially it 'clicks through' anaconda with a very basic hardware setup and checks it can complete. right now the only way to do it would be to run the automated testing as often as possible to catch basic breakage, and the manual installation validation test suite (done by the qa group members) on each ISO snapshot. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
