On 16 August 2013 19:41, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 08/15/2013 03:55 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
What's alarming with the decision to officially support upgrades that it was done without consulting the QA community, which are the ones that have to come up with the test cases,make the necessary changes to the release criteria, essentially have to do all the work and above all test it.
I am going to have to reverse the question. While I was helping out when I could from Red Hat 7 -> Fedora 7, QA always tested upgrades. The basic tests were:
1) Install last release, test an upgrade from that to latest. Report what broke.
2) Install release-2, test an upgrade from that to latest. Report what broke.
3) Install last release, rpm -Uvh (before yum and yum update afterwords), test an upgrade to latest. See what broke.
4) Install release-2....
If the install was "important" for some reason (in the RHL days that would have been something like RHL-5.2, RHL-6.2, RHL-7.3 and before core went away Fedora Core 6). you would do a chain upgrade (RHL-2.1 -> whatever now is.) and document what was broken. So sometime after Fedora 7.
Support of upgrades was basically that we knew it worked if you did this and it might work if you did that, and it probably won't work outside of that. So my guess is that sometime after F7 (maybe when upgrade was no longer a path in Anaconda?) it was considered not supported anymore?
Stephen J Smoogen.
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
