On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 15:40 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Finally, I have a new proposal for the issue of 'supported' desktops,
> which is blocking another planned criterion that we've been meaning to
> add for a while. I'm now proposing the term 'release-blocking desktops':
> it's simple, it do
> spin-kickstarts-0.15.6-1.fc15 has been built with the state used for RC3.
> It does not include the LXDE commit from after RC3. If a new LXDE is
> built before release then we should probably do another build before
> release. Same if SOAS has and ks changes before it is built. Otherwise
> I'll
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 03:40:21PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Feedback please! :) For reference, the new F16 pages are:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_16_Alpha_Release_Criteria
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_16_Beta_Release_Criteria
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedor
spin-kickstarts-0.15.6-1.fc15 has been built with the state used for RC3.
It does not include the LXDE commit from after RC3. If a new LXDE is
built before release then we should probably do another build before
release. Same if SOAS has and ks changes before it is built. Otherwise
I'll do another
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 15:40:21 -0700,
Adam Williamson wrote:
> * A spin-kickstarts package which contains the exact kickstart files
> used to build the release must be present in the release repository. The
> included kickstarts must define the correct set of release repositories
This is tric
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 17:21:57 -0700,
Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> FESCo, and I believe spins sig also believes it should have a say.
Note that Spins SIG is still pretty dysfunctional.
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/l
On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 01:54 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> Where you lack faith and trust and see inevitable failure on QA
> community's behalf I see a worthy task to be solved a solution to be
> found and even during this release cycle I revived some of that ideas
> and discussed them
2011/5/17 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" :
> On 05/18/2011 12:21 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> FESCo, and I believe spins sig also believes it should have a say.
>>
>> QA does indeed provide services to the entire distro, but our
>> responsibility is to provide the best QA we can for the things the
>> pro
On 05/18/2011 12:21 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> FESCo, and I believe spins sig also believes it should have a say.
>
> QA does indeed provide services to the entire distro, but our
> responsibility is to provide the best QA we can for the things the
> project considers a) vital and then b) importa
On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 00:13 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 05/18/2011 12:07 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > I would take it to FESCO.
>
> Fesco it is.
>
> I will post the relevant ticket once I've filed it to this threat for
> other from QA community ( and any other interested pa
On 05/18/2011 12:07 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> I would take it to FESCO.
Fesco it is.
I will post the relevant ticket once I've filed it to this threat for
other from QA community ( and any other interested party ) to cc
themselves upon choose they to do so.
Thanks.
JBG
--
test mailin
2011/5/17 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" :
> On 05/17/2011 11:29 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 23:17 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>>> On 05/17/2011 10:40 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
Finally, I have a new proposal for the issue of 'supported' desktops,
which is block
On 05/17/2011 11:29 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 23:17 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>> On 05/17/2011 10:40 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> Finally, I have a new proposal for the issue of 'supported' desktops,
>>> which is blocking another planned criterion that we've b
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 23:17 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 05/17/2011 10:40 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Finally, I have a new proposal for the issue of 'supported' desktops,
> > which is blocking another planned criterion that we've been meaning to
> > add for a while. I'm now propos
On 05/17/2011 10:40 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Finally, I have a new proposal for the issue of 'supported' desktops,
> which is blocking another planned criterion that we've been meaning to
> add for a while. I'm now proposing the term 'release-blocking desktops':
> it's simple, it does what it s
Hey, folks. Some release criteria stuff!
I've created the F16 criteria pages, copied across from F15. I added
some criteria we agreed on back in October 2010 to the Final page;
somehow we managed not to add these onto the F15 page, but they're in
there now. Those are:
* The final release notes (i
16 matches
Mail list logo
