Hey folks - so just ahead of the blocker meeting tomorrow, I'm done with the Final criteria rewrite. For now I've put it in a 'sandbox' space because I did make a few changes on-the-fly and they should get reviewed before we replace the old page, but if people think it's a good idea, we can use them for the meeting tomorrow. Here's the new version: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_final_criteria_sandbox The current one is of course at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_19_Final_Release_Criteria for comparison. Most of the changes I made are fairly minor tweaks to make the meanings more robust and stuff, but here's some more significant things I thought it made sense to change: * I made the 'checksum verification' thing a lot simpler; the existing one was written in two stages which made it read more complicated than it really needed to be. * I re-worded the 'catch-all' partitioning criterion to refer to "any file system and/or container format combination offered in a default installer configuration". It doesn't really make a functional difference I don't think, it just reads more clearly and is more 'future-proof'. * We were covering bootloaders in a half-assed way in the Windows dual boot criterion, but that seemed kinda dumb, so I figured it would make sense to break out an explicit bootloader criterion: "The installer must allow the user to choose which disk the system bootloader will be installed to, and to choose not to install one at all." In practice that's basically what we required to work for F18. * I 'cloned' the translation criterion for the installer; we were really intending the installer to be covered by the existing criterion, but it really wasn't clear in the wording. This way seemed more clear. * I wrote an exception for hardware-based services when the hardware isn't present into the 'services' criterion: we waived a couple of 'blockers' for F18 on the basis that it's okay if a service fails if it's for hardware that isn't present, so I thought it made sense to write that into the criterion. (Obviously it's best if we can make the service not fire unless the hardware is present, but I don't think it makes sense to block the release on that kind of thing). * I watered down the 'desktop' criteria quite a bit. Looking at them afresh I really think we were kind of over-reaching when we wrote them for F13: I remember we were thinking about 'polish criteria', but now we've had this process in place for a while, it really doesn't make sense to block the release on fairly trivial 'polish' issues (especially when we happily ship with much bigger issues in slightly different other areas). So I nuked the 'icons can't be fuzzy' requirement, the requirement for Help and About menus to be present, and the bit about apps not showing up twice in the menus. Those are all nice things to check, but I really don't think we need to be blocking releases on them. * I watered down the artwork criterion yet further: the initial idea was that we were going to be super-keen about having a consistent background graphic from bootloader to desktop, but that's really fallen by the wayside since F14 or so. Given our overall boot process nowadays, it only seems particularly important to make sure we use the right image for the desktop background. It'd be great if the project goes back to that goal, but clearly so far there hasn't been the development commitment to keep it going. Hope that covers everything! Yell if there's a change you can't see the reason for, and of course, all normal suggestions/improvements/questions/whatever welcome. Thanks folks! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
