On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:27 AM, drago01 <drago01@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 12:42 AM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Mon, 2012-02-20 at 20:59 +0100, drago01 wrote: >>> We currently don't have any explicit criterion that mandates that >>> keyboard layouts choose in the installer should work in the installed >>> system. >>> As a maintainer of one of the packages involved there >>> (system-setup-keyboard) I see such bugs in basically every release, >>> during the development cycle. >>> >>> We should pay more attention to such issues as a system that uses a >>> different keyboard layout as the one physically present can not only >>> be very annoying (we shouldn't release in that state) but >>> can be useless when you have special characters in your password(s). >>> (Can't easily decrypt / login). >>> >>> As seen in https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-March/097859.html >>> we do currently have a paragraph that mentions this but is IMO way to >>> vague. >>> >>> So I propose something like: "The keyboard layout selected in the >>> installer must be in use after rebooting the installer (plymouth and >>> X)". >> >> I wish I had better background on it, but I'm pretty sure we did discuss >> having an explicit criterion before going with the 'vague' paragraph >> instead. All that mail (by me) says is that I didn't think a specific >> criterion 'worked well', which is pretty useless looking back - sigh. >> >> One problem I do remember is that, in practice, we don't really want to >> block the release if a single extremely obscure keyboard layout turns >> out to be broken at the last minute; that's one factor in favor of the >> vague hand-wavey judgment call paragraph. We want to block only on >> reasonably popularly-used layouts, your Frenches and Germans and >> whatevers, but it's a bit hard to write a criterion that properly >> restricts the list without being too restrictive. > > Well the proposed criterion is explicit and narrow if it works in > anaconda it ought to work in the installed system. That means we have > proper support for it but something went wrong when writing out the > configuration. This is pretty straight forward to test and we > shouldn't really release with such a bug hence why it should block. So we hit such a bug again that is being proposed as a blocker for F17 ... we might catch them earlier by having a clear criterion (for beta) So any votes? -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
