On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 02:38:02PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > It's not so much a question of 'do we have the resources in place to > probably make sure it works at release time' but 'is it a terrible > disaster if we make a release in which it's broken'. That's what the > release validation process is meant to ensure, and _only_ that. It's not > like, if we don't make it a release blocker, it means no-one will care > about Xen and it will always be broken. > > I'm still madly catching up with stuff, but for me the only > consideration so far which falls into this category is the EC2 one, but > that is a *big* consideration. It's pretty close to being enough to make > me vote to have it as a criterion. It would certainly be unfortunate to > ship a release you couldn't install as an EC2 guest. Now that releng is doing and EC2 release, it would be unfortunate indeed. A lot of work has gone into this over the past year, and I don't think that putting non working images is an option. It seems a bit odd that with EC2 as a release platform, xen DomU wouldn't be a requirement for release criteria. In other news, Fedora 16 beta images are up on EC2, created and pushed by releng: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Cloud_SIG/EC2_Images Justin -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
