----- Original Message ----- > On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 22:14 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > > On 06/19/2012 09:03 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > I'll add to that to note that we now have Xfce, LXDE and Sugar > > > all on > > > the DVD. > > > > Which should have been added to the release blocker process when it > > got > > added there. > > > > From my point of view any handed out media at various events etc > > and > > what's on it should be considered release blocker. > > > > > > > > I've considered asking about making Xfce a blocking desktop, but > > > I have > > > no idea how the LXDE and Sugar communities are with helping > > > testing, > > > etc. > > > > > > It would mean added burden on QA folks to test more stuff, and > > > added > > > burden on maintainers of those desktops to create timely fixes > > > for any > > > blocker issues that come up. > > > > There is no such thing as added burden on QA + Me and James had > > already > > solved that problem long ago but never found the time to implement > > it > > like so many other things because we both where a bit busy with our > > $dayjobs. > > > > The solution was more or less this way > > > > If an manpower to cover anything else then critical path became a > > concern we should fetch that manpower from the relevant SIG's > > community. > > > > Basically the plan was to reach out for example to the > > Gnome/KDE/XFCE/LXDE/Sugar community's to ask for assistant to cover > > their relevant part of required testing if that was the case. > > > > If you think about it who are better qualified and more willing to > > test > > those components other then the people that are using it on daily > > bases... > > This is fine in theory, but it doesn't hold up terribly well in > practice. Just about every time we roll a TC/RC, I mail the lists for > each desktop - GNOME, KDE, Xfce, LXDE, and Sugar - and ask for help > in > filling out the validation matrix. And thank you very much for this email notification! > We get help fairly often for GNOME > and KDE, and satellit_ usually covers Sugar, but we very rarely get > anything for Xfce or LXDE. The main issue here is - the TC/RC images are "released" too fast to be able to fill in the matrix for all DE and all TCs/RCs. The idea could be - fill in the Matrix when first TC/RC is created, then follow closely the changes (to test only stuff that could be affected - hah, could be tricky) - not to fill the whole matrix and go through the all tests that even do not test the real change and then we can have one full matrix test for last one in the series of images and let some amount of time to do it (to mark it - done). Otherwise we will never have all DEs filled in as it's impossible in a time we have. And I have to thank you Fedora QA guys for helping us to cover KDE test, I always try my maximum but sometimes... R. > -- > Adam Williamson > Fedora QA Community Monkey > IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora > http://www.happyassassin.net > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
