2016-11-15 17:12 GMT+01:00 Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Andreas Tunek <andreas.tunek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> 2016-11-15 15:35 GMT+01:00 Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx>: >>> On 15 November 2016 at 01:35, Andreas Tunek <andreas.tunek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> 2016-11-15 1:06 GMT+01:00 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx>: >>> >>>>> You seem to confuse something being in the release criteria, and >>>>> something being possible. But that's secondary. If you would like this >>>>> scenario to be supported, then commit to testing it before the next >>>>> release (in advance, at least a week before the beta freeze). >>>>> >>>> >>>> If something is in the release criteria I expect the feature to be >>>> present in the release. If the feature in question has worked for ~20 >>>> Fedora releases it is not my first priority to test, unless there is >>>> specific communication otherwise, like specific "Mac install testing >>>> days" (which to my knowledge there hasn't been). >>> >>> You seem to be under a misapprehension on how distributions are >>> built.. even ones which are paid for. In any distribution, if >>> something is important then the stakeholders (the people who think it >>> is important) make sure that it is funded so that the resources are >>> there for testing. That funding in a corporate distribution is in >>> paying for equipment, staff and hours to get that item tested and >>> developed. In a 'free' distribution, that funding is volunteering the >>> time to make sure it is tested. [And even in paid distributions, when >>> things aren't paid for and people assume that X was going to be >>> there.. if X isn't working on release day it comes back to the >>> stakeholders that they needed not to assume it would be.] >>> >>> >> >> I was under the (mis?)assumption that, due to being in the release >> criteria, mac "support" was important for Fedora. It seems to have >> been that way for 10 years. > > It is as important as any other platform that the community wants to support. > >> If that is not the case anymore it would be good if that would be >> communicated in advance so that all users on mac hw could either >> switch distros or gang together to make a remix or something. > > You are confusing Fedora with a company. There is no top-down > communication on what is or is not supported. There is no hardware > support list or hardware certification list. It is literally what > people show up and test. > Maybe the release criteria should reflect that then. Right now it says that mac support is a criteria for release. >> As a user and very occasional contributor (mostly of bug reports) it >> is very hard to know what is most important to test. AFAIK there >> wasn't any "Installer test day" or anything similar. So I and a lot of >> people probably tested other stuff*. > > As a user and contributor, it is important to test what YOU find > important. If that is Macs, then test every aspect of Mac support > (install, runtime, etc). If it doesn't work, report it. If it does > and you want to move on to testing something else, do that. > > The cumulative efforts define what works and doesn't work in Fedora on > any given release. > As everyone else I have limited time and resources and lot of things a care about in an OS. It is unfortunately impossible for me to test everything. >> If I would have paid for RHEL 8 and it did not work on hardware that >> RHEL 7.3 supported without any communication from Red Hat I would get >> pissed and most probably find another vendor. > > That's the primary difference between Fedora and RHEL. RHEL is made > to support what people pay for and the Service Level Agreements > dictate what is and isn't supported. Fedora is made by people that > want to see something work, and that thing working is entirely > contingent upon people showing up to make sure it does. > Yes and the people who showed up and did the work has made a release criteria. Do you want to change that? > josh > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
