On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:08 PM, Adam Williamson <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 10:19 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 3:26 AM, James Hogarth <james.hogarth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Having upgraded and freshly installed systems so different is going to
> > be messy with supporting users and in many deployed environments...
> > and it's not even about F26 and F27 -> F28 but what happens on an F29+
> > system?
> >
> > Is this workaround going to be maintained in perpetuity? Is it just
> > going to cause even more confusion then?
>
> I agree. Sometimes it's just best to have a flag day.
>
> Also, the Workstation PRD indicates a requirement that upgrades
> produce a system that behaves the same as a clean installed system,
> and I question whether a proposal expressing a difference between
> upgraded and clean installed systems meets that requirement.
>
> "Upgrading the system multiple times through the upgrade process
> should give a result that is the same as an original install of Fedora
> Workstation."
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Workstation/Workstation_ PRD
To be honest, that requirement is a pretty substantial overreach. We
have no realistic means of verifying it and I strongly suspect we've
never actually achieved it.
We should probably rephrase it (and the release criterion, which IIRC
says something similar) to be more realistic, though I admit I can't
come up with a great idea right now.
This wording in the Workstation PRD really is looking toward Atomic Workstation or similar technology in the future - not saying that we expect to achieve this goal 100% (or even 95%...) with RPM based installs.
Owen
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
