On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 23:21 -0400, Doug Ledford wrote: > > I had a closer look at the raid setup on my f15-box and as the raid was > > up as expected and poking at the raid with mdadm didn't turn up any > > issues, I've given it positive karma which has made it "Critpath > > approved". > > Thanks for that. I hope you read my other emails to Adam about the > testing of mdadm. My point of those being that there is more to mdadm > than *just* bringing the raid arrays up (although that is, of course, > the biggest thing). The fact that monitoring is down on the previous > version but ok on the current version is a big deal. Monitoring is > almost as important in the real world as it is the difference between an > array going degraded and you knowing or you doing nothing until it > finally dies altogether. Well, we are still talking about a *pre-release* here, remember. No-one's supposed to trust any data (or drives) they care about to a pre-release. A failure in RAID monitoring would not break any Beta release criteria, though we would have probably accepted it as NTH if it had been proposed. (It also doesn't break any Final release criteria at present; we could consider changing that, but we might not). You don't need to worry about Final as the update will get pushed as soon as the Beta freeze is lifted, but if future issues arise, please do propose a bug as NTH or Blocker if you think it should be fixed before release. Since this is an issue in monitoring and not array activation, it can be fixed satisfactorily with an update, yes? The fixed mdadm will be available as an update immediately after install (if the user leaves updates-testing checked) or once the freeze is lifted (if the user disables that repo). -- 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
