On 18/03/13 07:08 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
For "Supported media types" and the link to the list of officially
supported methods - it's not as easy to find it on that page. I'd
say a list on criteria page would be better, even it requires sync
with the link...
Thanks for the idea, I'll take a
- Original Message -
> Hey, folks. CCing anaconda list on this one due to the changes to the
> partitioning requirements (see below) - please send replies to test@,
> though, to avoid a thread fork.
>
> Further to my previous mail -
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2013-Mar
> Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 13:14:15 -0700
> From: awill...@redhat.com
> To: test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Subject: Re: Major criteria re-write / re-design proposal: Beta draft
>
> On 15/03/13 12:54 PM, John Dulaney wrote:
> >
> > One question: For the virt criter
On 15/03/13 12:54 PM, John Dulaney wrote:
One question: For the virt criterion, would it not be better to s/recommended
Fedora virtualization tools/supported Fedora virtualization tools? It seems to
me that by stating that only the recommended virt tools are supported, you
might as well be say
One question: For the virt criterion, would it not be better to s/recommended
Fedora virtualization tools/supported Fedora virtualization tools? It seems to
me that by stating that only the recommended virt tools are supported, you
might as well be saying supported.
John.
Hey, folks. CCing anaconda list on this one due to the changes to the
partitioning requirements (see below) - please send replies to test@,
though, to avoid a thread fork.
Further to my previous mail -
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2013-March/114198.html -
I've now got a firs
On 11/03/13 06:30 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On 11/03/13 08:17 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
I'm not fully convinced on the presentation style, I find the
collapsible comments to be more visible than the criteria themselves
(they are bold and highlighted, so they draw more attention), but
that's someth
On 11/03/13 08:17 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
I'm not fully convinced on the presentation style, I find the
collapsible comments to be more visible than the criteria themselves
(they are bold and highlighted, so they draw more attention), but
that's something that we can tweak easily.
I tried to com
On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 17:45:26 +0200
moshe nahmias wrote:
> I like better the grey background with normal text, it makes the lines
> easier to find and breaks the monotonous white background.
> On the other hand it's a matter of taste more then anything.
I'm also +1 to the grey background. It brea
On Fri, 08 Mar 2013 17:24:38 -0800
Adam Williamson wrote:
> DESIGN STUFF
>
>
> * group the criteria into a few sections, and made (almost) each
> individual criterion a sub-section - this might seem a bit odd at
> first, but it breaks up the 'wall of text' flow, makes the table of
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:45 AM, moshe nahmias wrote:
> I like better the grey background with normal text, it makes the lines
> easier to find and breaks the monotonous white background.
> On the other hand it's a matter of taste more then anything.
I have to agree here -- I like the gray backg
I like better the grey background with normal text, it makes the lines
easier to find and breaks the monotonous white background.
On the other hand it's a matter of taste more then anything.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > I'm not fully convinced on the presentation style
> I'm not fully convinced on the presentation style, I find the
> collapsible comments to be more visible than the criteria themselves
> (they are bold and highlighted, so they draw more attention), but
> that's something that we can tweak easily.
I tried to come up with a few more designs of the
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 8:24 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> I don't think I've completely nailed the *design*, though, so it's
> important to remember these two things are separable, to a degree.
I think the layout and the content are much better, so thank you.
Sure, the design isn't perfect -- but
> Looks good, but I do have 2 things, one that isn't clear to me and
> one suggestion to make things clearer.
Thanks for your feedback!
> On the "Package sets" paragraph, it says "the installer must be able
> to install each of the release blocking desktops, as well as the
> minimal package set."
Hi,
Looks good, but I do have 2 things, one that isn't clear to me and one
suggestion to make things clearer.
On the "Alpha Release Requirements" paragraph, there is the sentence
"Mostly met items are incomplete until they are met.", what does it mean?
Or is it the obvios, that most of the criter
Hi, folks. So I've been working on this for a while, but we're getting
close to F19 Alpha time and I really want to get it out there for
comments.
Several people have noted that the release criteria have grown quite a
lot over time. Just compare F13 and F18:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_
17 matches
Mail list logo
