On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 16:47 -0400, James Laska wrote: > On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 13:44 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > I know there's a bit of a backlog of proposed criteria changes I really > > should look at, but wanted to write this one down before it escapes. Per > > the thread 'Syslog not running?', I'd like to propose the following > > Alpha criterion for future releases: > > > > * A system logging infrastructure must be available, enabled by default, > > and must work as intended, and in accordance with relevant standards > > accepted by the Project > > > > (Improvements to the wording welcome, I'm trying to keep it from going > > stale by not specifying particular logger implementations or file > > locations) > > ACK! :) > > My usual concerns about encompassing too much ... should we elaborate on > "working as intended"? Clearly we are interested in whether it works in > the most basic sense ... not if remote logging a select set of messages > to another system fails (or is that included too)? No, I think basic local logging is all we're interested in. Revision: * A system logging infrastructure must be available and enabled by default. It must provide at least basic local file-based logging of kernel messages, and allow other components to write log messages. This must be done in accordance with relevant standards accepted by the Project better? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
