On Thu, 2011-09-08 at 19:42 +0100, agraham wrote: > > It's intentionally ambiguous: I try to write the criteria as generically > > as possible. This ensures we don't have to rewrite them just because we > > change tack. (Remember, our 'preferred virt technology' was Xen not so > > long ago; if we'd had hardcoded criteria that stated 'Xen' at that > > point, we'd have had to rewrite them to say 'KVM'). I think it's just > > more correct, too: our intent is not that 'KVM should work', really, our > > intent really is 'whatever Fedora currently reckons is The Good Stuff > > should work'. Same reason the criteria say 'the installer' and not > > 'anaconda', and 'refer generically to 'release-blocking desktops', not > > 'GNOME and KDE'. > > I fully understand where you are coming from, when it comes to policy > statements, they usually refer to now and possibly the past, but not > future. because policies usually needs to change as you state. sure, but it certainly helps to write them in such a way that they'll need to change as little as possible. it's already enough work maintaining the criteria :/ -- 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
