On Mon, 06 Jan 2014 20:20:45 +0000 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 01/06/2014 05:42 PM, Tim Flink wrote: > > I want to focus on getting the base > > automation working well so that we can go to the WGs with "here's > > our automation system and this is how you write tasks for it. we'll > > help with getting tasks run but you all need to maintain the ones > > specific to you and commit to keeping an eye on the output". > > > > Anyhow, that's the plan in my head. I'm sure there'll be bumps in > > the road and changes before it's all said and done but it's a > > start:) > > Yes but to be able to work on it requires man power and time and the > man power is short and the time even shorter ;) True, but I look at it as an investment - costly in the short term but will yield benefits in increased testing of Fedora and increased sanity for qa folks > If we want to free time to work on stuff like this Anaconda release > cycle and testing must be finished before alpha or dealt with after > beta. Sure, that could end up being useful but it's but one piece of the puzzle. It looks like 2014 is going to be an interesting year with all the potential changes coming up. Summing all that up as "everything would be OK if we could just change anaconda's dev/release cycle" is a bit simplistic and a touch naive. I'm not saying that there wouldn't be benefits to such a change - it's just not that simple. There are other things that will need to change if we (qa) want to survive fedora.next and retain some semblance of quality for Fedora as a whole. Tim
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
