Re: Suggest a new criterion for Suspend.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 2020-04-07 at 10:22 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 7:55 AM Lukas Ruzicka <lruzicka@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Yes, we are aware that suspend is hardware dependent and we might end up blocking on a particular set of hardware once we are able to identify such a set. Any ideas are welcome.
> 
> I think a "squishy" approach here might be the best option. So we
> don't care which hardware specifically, but the general impact. Is it
> 1% of hardware? We probably don't want to block on it. Is it 10% of
> hardware? That might be more compelling. Is it 100% of hardware? Yeah,
> this is a blocker. Obviously we can't use specific numbers, but
> focusing on the scale of the impact the idea.

This is actually already the policy:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Blocker_Bug_FAQ#What_about_hardware_and_local_configuration_dependent_issues.3F

I think we do already sometimes call that out specifically in
footnotes for criteria which are very strongly hardware-related. I
think we'd definitely want to do that in this case: both linking to
that note, and having a "specific" note for this criterion which would
cover the issues we're debating right now. I would perhaps want to say
that we'll bias the evaluation towards laptops (i.e. we'd be more
likely to take suspend issues that affect laptops as release blocking)
as it's a feature that's more critical on laptops than on desktops...I
suspend my desktop a lot, but it's not *critical*, if the feature's
broken I either leave it running or deal with the inconvenience of
shutting it down and powering it back on, but that's not really
practical for a laptop.

> Do we want to scope it specifically to desktop-oriented deliverables?
> Suspending Workstation or the KDE Spin is probably a common use case.
> Suspending Server less so. I don't expect there would be cases where
> that would actually matter, since they should share the important
> parts in common, but if nothing else, it reduces the number of tests
> that need to be done.

This seems reasonable, yeah. I'd also suggest it needs to be an
*installed system* criterion - I don't think we want to require suspend
to work in the live environment.
-- 
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




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Photo Sharing]     [Yosemite Forum]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux