On Wed, 2011-08-17 at 12:48 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2011-08-17 at 12:43 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > So while I was discussing an EFI issue with Peter Jones we noticed that > > the current release criterion dealing with EFI installs could be > > improved. It's a Beta criterion, and it reads: > > > > "The installer must boot and run on systems using EFI other than Apple > > Macs" > > > > The wording 'boot and run' is a bit odd, what we really want is to be > > able to complete an installation, so propose: > > > > "In most cases (see Blocker_Bug_FAQ), the installer must boot, run, and > > be capable of installing a correct bootloader configuration on systems > > using EFI other than Apple Macs. The installed system must boot > > successfully via EFI" > > > > We'd also like to propose moving the criterion to Alpha for F17: EFI is > > becoming progressively more important over time and will continue to do > > so. Peter says over 50% of currently shipping server systems use EFI by > > default. We think F17 is the appropriate timeframe to make EFI an Alpha > > requirement. > > Now I think about it, here's an alternative: let's just dump the > EFI-specific criterion and take EFI bugs under the generic criteria. I > don't see why we can't just say that the installer failing to boot on an > EFI system is a violation of "The installer must boot (if appropriate) > and run on all primary architectures from default live image, DVD, and > boot.iso install media", for instance. It *is*, after all. Ditto for "In > most cases (see Blocker_Bug_FAQ), a system installed according to any of > the above criteria (or the appropriate Beta or Final criteria, when > applying this criterion to those releases) must boot to the 'firstboot' > utility on the first boot after installation", and any of the "The > installer must be able to complete an installation" clauses... So people were generally in favour of taking EFI bugs as release blockers, but no-one really expressed a preference as to which of these two approaches would be best. I think I prefer the second one, so I'll go ahead and put that in place unless anyone has real preference for the first approach, or wants to propose an alternative approach. Again, the proposal boils down to: amend Alpha criterion: "The installer must boot (if appropriate) and run on all primary architectures from default live image, DVD, and boot.iso install media" to read: "The installer must boot (if appropriate) and run on all primary architectures, with all system firmware types that are common on those architectures, from default live image, DVD, and boot.iso install media" if everyone's good with that, I'll go ahead and put it in place soon. thanks! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
