On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 01:54 +0000, "JÃhann B. GuÃmundsson" wrote: > Where you lack faith and trust and see inevitable failure on QA > community's behalf I see a worthy task to be solved a solution to be > found and even during this release cycle I revived some of that ideas > and discussed them loosely with James on irc which involved completely > revisiting our process and I have full confident that we together ( QA > Community ) can come up with and engineer a solution that not only will > survive the past growth of the project but also any future growth that > will happen in years to come. > > The only inevatibly thing in this equation is that I will still be here > when you or James have either move up and or move toward another > position within Red Hat or quit for one reason or another that is if I > will still be breathing before that time.. I said it'd be an inevitable failure if we had to test every desktop in the world - it was just a silly exaggeration to make a point; that our job is to try and provide QA for the scope of Fedora _as defined by the appropriate group_, and we are not the group that defines the scope of the project. I'm not suggesting any particular vision of what that scope should be. I agree with many of your ideas - remember, I'm the one who first tried to propose that XFCE and LXDE should be able to block the release, and proposed the desktop validation process so that we now do organized testing on those desktops where we didn't before. I'm not saying that I don't think it would be a good idea for Fedora to consider more than a single desktop important; personally I think that _would_ be a good idea. All I'm saying is that we have to discuss and decide that on a wider level than the QA group. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
