On Sat, 2019-09-07 at 14:43 +0200, Alessio wrote: > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 5:12 PM Julen Landa Alustiza > <jlanda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Sure there are better explanations but... > > > > DOOMED: a mandatory step for our blocking deliverables failed. x86_64 workstation dvd iso can't build for example > > FINISHED_INCOMPLETE: a non blocking deliverable failed. x86_64 xfce dvd iso for example > > FINISHED (i'm not sure, didn't see it for a while): all was built > > Hello. Just a doubt. > But, if Workstation/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Workstation-netinst is a > blocking deliverable > (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/31/ReleaseBlocking). > And such ISO is not there, why is the result of Fedora-31-20190907.n.0 > compose FINISHED_INCOMPLETE and not DOOMED? That's actually a great question! The answer is basically this ticket: https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/45 i.e., we just don't make the Workstation install tree at all any more. Which means no Workstation-specific network install image is even attempted to be generated; so composes don't die because it "fails", because we don't even try to build it. However, the list of release-blocking deliverables clearly needs to be updated for this change. I'm CCing Ben Cotton and Michael Catanzaro just to be sure, but I assume everyone would be fine with just dropping the Workstation netinst from the release-blocking images list, based on the conversation in the ticket. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ test mailing list -- test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to test-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
