#322: New release criterion: no X libs in the minimal install set
-------------------------------+-----------------
Reporter: mattdm | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: Release criteria | Version:
Resolution: | Keywords:
Blocked By: | Blocking:
-------------------------------+-----------------
Comment (by kparal):
I like the proposal itself (I also believe minimal install should not
contain X), but I don't think QA should be the authority that decides and
dictates this condition.
I think currently it is very unclear who manages different flavors of
Fedora and who gets the decision powers. Who owns the desktop flavor (or
should I call it a spin?)? Who owns the minimal flavor? Who should I
report bugs to? Who decides what should be there and what should be not? I
don't think FESCo should be bothered every time we want to add a remove a
package. It must be someone else.
I'm currently not very clear on these matters, especially wrt minimal
flavor. I suspect desktop SIG would own the desktop flavor, but it's very
possible that no-one manages minimal flavor at all. I tried to find some
document on our wiki that would address this, but I failed. So any
explanations are welcome (I guess adamw will know, he knows everything).
After this is cleared up, I think we should talk to the minimal flavor
maintainer (or create one first?), whether this is the current policy or
not ("no X in minimal") and whether Fedora release should be blocked if
some X package happens to enter the set.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/322#comment:1>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
--
test mailing list
test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
