On 12/03/2009 03:03 PM, Clyde E. Kunkel wrote: > On 12/03/2009 02:21 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: >> On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 11:45 -0500, Clyde E. Kunkel wrote: >> >>> Reading the anaconda list, I see a very large number of changes coming >>> down the road, all significant and probably as complex as the storage >>> rewrite. I bet the anaconda developers would appreciate the widest >>> possible testing as soon as changes hit rawhide. >>> >>> If rawhide is to be frozen, can a mechanism to test anaconda, at a >>> minimum, be provided? Testing the rest of rawhide is easy and has been >>> well documented. >>> >>> Thanks, from a cheerful anaconda tester who may now be tearful. >> >> Well, if you read the posts from Peter Jones, that's actually *not* what >> they want. They say they want to move to model where they provide images >> for testing anaconda when they're ready to. >> > > Then why put updates in rawhide? For the live isos? I know there is a > way with updages.img files to test, but creating them is beyond me. > Also, I guess we could use Mr. Keating's pungi method. > > It is too bad that the good old days of easily testing the cool changes > being made in anaconda are over. I think this is a severe mischaracterization. I really think that this change should actually make testing /less/ difficult - in that the thing you're testing will be something we at least think /should/ work. Think of this as a plan to make testable images flow pretty often, but to limit /untestable/ images. -- Peter If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts. -- Einstein -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list