On Tue, 2014-09-30 at 09:50 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > That sounds workable, so long as someone's actually making sure we > *do* > comply with those. Has anyone checked that yet? I'd rather not throw > it > in the criteria and then have to fudge it immediately :) Salutations, A bit late I know, but I found three issues through the highly-advanced testing process of turning on high contrast mode: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1130794 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152792 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152796 Of the three, setroubleshoot is the only one that's potentially problematic here, since somebody would need to make a new icon and setroubleshoot is arguably important enough to block on (as opposed to simply dropping it). We don't want OpenJDK Policy Tool. GNOME Logs is easy to fix (but I think we do not want that, either). If anybody finds more issues in the future, we can deal with them as they come. I don't propose revising the guidelines or the release criterion; that they cover these issues simply shows that they solve a real problem for us (in this case, ensuring our high contrast support does not regress). Michael
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
