Question: Is there a 'deferred' state these kinds of issues can be moved to?
That might be an acceptable middle-ground so that issues are maintained, yet rational is provided for why they are not worked in this release.
Just a thought.
-Joe
From: Petr Schindler <pschindl@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2012 10:14 AM
Subject: Re: [criteria update] Rescue mode
On Pá, 2012-07-27 at 08:53 -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Petr Schindler <pschindl@xxxxxxxxxx> said:
> > Because of changes in new anaconda [1] and after short discussion with
> > Chris Lumens, I propose to remove this beta criterion [2]:
> >
> > 'The rescue mode of the installer must be able to detect and mount
> > (read-write and read-only) LVM, encrypted, and RAID (BIOS, hardware, and
> > software) installations'
> >
> > Reason (according to Chris): There's been no work done on rescue mode
> > and it is highly unlikely that it does anything at all right now.
>
> You've proposed removing rescue mode criteria from both alpha and beta;
> is there going to be any requirement for a functional rescue mode for
> this release? That's a pretty critical thing to have completely missing
> from a release; things that occasionally happen such as a broken boot
> loader would render an install virtually unrecoverable for many users.
It is about discussion to accept this change. If there will be lot of
opinions against this change, we will let it be as it is and anaconda
will have to make their best to bring rescue mod. We can also change
this criterion. It's on discussion. Note that those changes are
hopefully only for F18. In F19 there should be everything back.
--
test mailing list
test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
-- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
