On 09/08/2011 08:22 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > 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 :/ Regarding the term "Releases", what does this mean? Does it include all versions of the Live CDs/USB images as well as the normal DVDs images. i.e. anything on the download page (for a specific version + n-1), I'm just thinking of what actually needs to be tested in order to meet the policy. Albert. -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
