On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 14:25, Chris Lumens <clumens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> kickstart is a very broad area; you can write extremely complex >> kickstart files that do a lot of stuff. So broadly what we'd need to do >> is define a subset of kickstart functionality that we expect to work, >> and then possibly divide that up by release phase (so some stuff must >> work by Beta, the rest by Final, for e.g.) >> >> anaconda devs following this list, do you have any existing expectations >> as to what level of kickstart functionality ought to be in place for >> releases, and when you think would be appropriate? >> >> So far it seems everyone more or less agrees that it should be possible >> to do at least a basic unattended kickstart install by Beta. > > You're right, kickstart is incredibly broad. I don't think we could > ever hope to come up with criteria to cover all of it. I guess the best > we can do is define criteria in terms of something else we already have. I would go for the classical kickstart test for Alpha: Does it take a minimal kickstart and build a default system. The minimal being the exact stuff that would be created if a person just clicked through a release. For Beta Take these X broken kickstarts, does it bail at the appropriate places. Take these Y working kickstarts, does it work. Where Y is a set of items that can be tested on say a KVM or a "default" desktop defined somewhere. For Final The above and some subset of obscure items that can be tested reliably somewhere that development and QA can replicate. -- Stephen J Smoogen. "The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance." Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University. "Let us be kind, one to another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle." -- Ian MacLaren -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
