On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2012-11-10 9:36, Josh Boyer wrote: >> >> >> 1) It's making something Fedora does not build, provide, or have any >> influence on part of our release process. Doubly so if you're going >> down the "test it using Windows or OS X as a host" route. I'm >> personally not thrilled at all about adding such dependencies as >> criteria at the moment. I also think if you're running it using a >> Linux host, then there are other options we already support that do >> just fine... > > > As others have pointed out, this is really rather a matter of perception. Yes, I'm aware of that. The problem space here is "what is Fedora's perception, fitting in within the confines of our rules, community, and abilities." > I suggest that your use of the plural 'options' there is somewhat > optimistic. As things stand we nominally support two 'options' - KVM and The definiton of "plural" is "more than one". That is a fact and usage of plural nouns does not connotate anything other than the existance of more than one option. Now, if you want to debate the usefulness of those options, fine. Xen sucks. I wasn't thrilled with _it_ being made a criteria either, but hey it's there now and the cloud people love it out of necessity. > Xen. Both of these have significant limitations. Xen in itself is, let's > face it, not popular. Especially not popular for desktop virt. To a rough > approximation, no-one uses it for that. KVM does not work on Windows hosts, Why are you talking about Windows hosts in a reply to a fragment where I clearly said "Linux host"? > The KVM stack works well on Fedora / RHEL and (so I've heard) reasonably > well on Ubuntu. I don't know if it's widely used or supported on other > distributions, or even necessarily packaged for them. It definitely is not > an option on Windows or OS X. Again. I said "Linux host". >> Maybe we already have testcases that are run but are not criteria. I >> honestly have no idea. If we do, I think that would be a better fit >> than trying to put some kind of weight behind Fedora as a guest in >> these cases. > > > We do, and that's a plausible outcome. But I think those pushing for a > stronger approach than this are making a decent case. It's at least worth I can make strong cases for many things we cannot scale to. I'd love to see those pushing for this to actually step up and do it. Get testcases written, form groups of triagers, just run the damn tests regardless of criteria status, present results. And KEEP doing that until we can see that this isn't a flash in the pan and it's sustainable. josh -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
