On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 6:08 AM, Kamil Paral <kpa...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Now that Fedora 25 is out of the door, I'd like to start a discussion > about > > the future of officially-supported (meaning rigorously tested) optical > media > > for future Fedora releases. > > The discussion died off, so let me summarize and propose a plan. > > We haven't received as much feedback as I hoped for. Maybe people don't > care enough about optical disks to even respond, or it might be a different > reason. But we also didn't receive as much negative feedback as I feared. > So hopefully this does not negatively impact too many people. The comments > under the Phoronix article [1] weren't too helpful either, a few rants but > no-one cared to follow up with some explanation or system specification > which would be negatively affected for his/her use case. Some of them, I > believe, just read the article title without realizing this only affects > Alpha/Beta media or certain flavors of Final media. > > [1] http://phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Fedora-Post- > 25-Optical-Future > > > > Idea #1: Do not block on optical media issues for Alpha and Beta releases > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > This is the less controversial idea, I believe. We received a concern from > Matthew, who was worried that we might find out too late if we don't check > it for Alpha/Beta. I partly agree, but believe we should solve it with an > improved QA processes, instead of bumping the release criteria to apply > earlier. He did not object to this, and nobody else did, so I assume > everyone agrees :-) If there are no further concerns, I'll prepare a > criterion adjustment proposal for this. > > > > > Idea #2: Do not block on optical media issues for Final release for > certain > > flavors/image types (Server, netinst) > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > This is a bolder variant of the previous idea and can be done separately > or > > combined with it. It makes optical media functionality not guaranteed > even > > for Final release, but just for certain Fedora flavors or image types for > > which it makes sense (not all of them). Which images to cover, that's the > > heart of the discussion. If you look into our test matrix again, we > > currently block on 6 of them: > > * Workstation Live + netinst > > * KDE Live > > * Server DVD + netinst > > * Everything netinst > > This was received with reasonably positive reception as well. But it's > harder to compile a list which images should be covered by criteria and > which not. > - Workstation Live will be covered, that's clear - we give out these DVDs > at events, it's sent out to the developing world > - Everything netinst is the most universal and generic netinst, so > covering that one means we don't need to cover Workstation netinst and > Server netinst. People seem to agree to this. > - Nobody argued for KDE Live. We probably don't bulk press KDE Live DVDs. > If we cover Workstation Live, it's improbable that only KDE Live would > break, but not impossible. If such thing happens, are people OK with > releasing Fedora XX KDE Live only bootable over USB? > - Server DVD is a mixed bag. Matthew didn't include it in his block-list, > Adam did. Neal uses it over IMPI (but netinst would be good enough for him > IIUIC, sans some package deps issue which can be solved using a kickstart). > I would appreciate more feedback from Server folks. Again, we'll cover > netinst so it's improbable DVD would break, but not impossible. Are people > OK releasing it only bootable over USB (and PXE)? > > Thanks. > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > >We haven't received as much feedback as I hoped for. Maybe people don't care enough about optical disks to even respond, or it might be a different reason. I must have missed this and deleted it by mistake. I had something weird happen when F23 was the latest release. Somehow, probably through user error, I deleted my partition table and bricked my only USB stick. I think I corrupted the USB stick firmware somehow. I have only one computer so using another to get another copy wasn't an option. I did have a back up Fedora DVD because an earlier experience in life when I found myself without an OS and a broken installation. I think that having a read only media option with physical damage as the only failure mode is valuable. I continue to keep a Fedora DVD even though I prefer installing through USB.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
