On 08/26/2011 12:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 23:54 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > >> I'm still on the opinion that we should not be adding an ks testing to >> the alpha criteria. >> >> Cant we just create a set of most commonly ks use cases in ks files for >> releng and they can use pungi to test it with and post the result >> somewhere online with pass/fail more of an autoqa task and say all those >> must pass before beta? >> >> Where does the need for those ks testing suddenly come from and why do >> we need to have those ks test involved in alpha? > sorry, I skipped over Smooge's mention of Alpha. I was aiming for Beta, > not Alpha. I think Smooge's minimal 'does a stock install ks file work' > would be fine as a Beta test. Given that this is something we should be able to automate and more of a task/project for autoqa I dont think we should be limiting ourself with minimal install and aim for more extensive tests than minimal I'm pretty sure Anaconda team and probably various other project members would also like to upload a .ks file somewhere and that file be put in a queue and the test ks process would process that queue on an x interval or simply test give pass or fail if fail, save logs post somewhere, delete file(s) and process next ks . JBG -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
