On Fri, 2021-09-17 at 09:34 +0200, Kamil Paral wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 7:17 PM Adam Williamson
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2021-08-25 at 11:33 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 11:03 AM Kamil Paral wrote:
> > > > Or if we want to have some exact numbers, what about "it m
On 9/17/21 07:29, Lukas Ruzicka wrote:
What if we replaced the "10 seconds" with something like "reasonably fast".
With different machines people could have different expectations, so
somebody could consider 10 seconds a long time, while others could take 20
for normal.
This could make more roo
What if we replaced the "10 seconds" with something like "reasonably fast".
With different machines people could have different expectations, so
somebody could consider 10 seconds a long time, while others could take 20
for normal.
This could make more room for usual experience and expectations.
O
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 3:35 AM Kamil Paral wrote:
>
> But I also missed his announcement, and when this discussion was renewed, I
> thought the criterion still wasn't finalized and in effect. It seems I wasn't
> the only one :o)
>
I also forgot that I had done it when the discussion picked back
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 7:17 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-08-25 at 11:33 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 11:03 AM Kamil Paral wrote:
> > > Or if we want to have some exact numbers, what about "it must not add
> more than 10 seconds to a regular system boot speed"
On Wed, 2021-08-25 at 11:33 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 11:03 AM Kamil Paral wrote:
> > Or if we want to have some exact numbers, what about "it must not add more
> > than 10 seconds to a regular system boot speed".
>
> I have no objections to that.
It seems Ben went ahea
On Wed, 2021-08-25 at 17:01 +0200, Kamil Paral wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 2:30 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 6:44 AM Kamil Paral wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > If a utility for creating user accounts and other configuration is
> > configured to launch, it must be visible wi
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 11:03 AM Kamil Paral wrote:
> Or if we want to have some exact numbers, what about "it must not add more
> than 10 seconds to a regular system boot speed".
I have no objections to that.
--
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/India
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 2:30 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 6:44 AM Kamil Paral wrote:
> >
> >> > > If a utility for creating user accounts and other configuration is
> configured to launch, it must be visible within 10 seconds of the first
> boot reaching the launch point.
> >
>
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 6:44 AM Kamil Paral wrote:
>
>> > > If a utility for creating user accounts and other configuration is
>> > > configured to launch, it must be visible within 10 seconds of the first
>> > > boot reaching the launch point.
>
> I'm not exactly clear on what "the launch point
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 12:44 PM Kamil Paral wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 12:00 AM Adam Williamson <
> adamw...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 2021-03-14 at 11:13 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
>> > In the wake of the BZ 1924808[1] discussion in Thursday's Go/No-Go
>> > meeting[2], I am pro
My guess is that we start counting when the wall paper is up and the top
bar is displayed.
Have a Great Day!
Pat (tablepc)
On 8/25/21 06:43, Kamil Paral wrote:
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 12:00 AM Adam Williamson
wrote:
On Sun, 2021-03-14 at 11:13 -0400, Ben Cotton wrot
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 12:00 AM Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Sun, 2021-03-14 at 11:13 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > In the wake of the BZ 1924808[1] discussion in Thursday's Go/No-Go
> > meeting[2], I am proposing an addition to the Basic Release
> > Criteria[3]. This would go into Post-Install Re
On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 4:00 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2021-03-14 at 11:13 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > In the wake of the BZ 1924808[1] discussion in Thursday's Go/No-Go
> > meeting[2], I am proposing an addition to the Basic Release
> > Criteria[3]. This would go into Post-Install Re
On Sun, 2021-03-14 at 11:13 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> In the wake of the BZ 1924808[1] discussion in Thursday's Go/No-Go
> meeting[2], I am proposing an addition to the Basic Release
> Criteria[3]. This would go into Post-Install Requirements -> Expected
> installed system boot behavior -> First b
Hi Chris
With the beta being very very very clean, and functional, the Linux community
has taken the date of 25March as the official release date.I found a design
flaw, but not a malfunction with the beta.
Regards
Leslie
Leslie Satenstein
Montréal Québec, Canada
On Wednesday, Apri
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 1:13 PM Brandon Nielsen wrote:
>
> On 4/13/21 9:39 AM, Ben Cotton wrote:
> [Snip]
> >
> >> There must be no SELinux denial notifications or crash notifications on
> >> boot of or during installation from a release-blocking live image, or at
> >> first login after a defaul
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 02:13:31PM -0500, Brandon Nielsen wrote:
> Does that make this[0] a blocker candidate?
> [0] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943683
Looks like it to me.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
test mailing li
On 4/14/21 2:13 PM, Brandon Nielsen wrote:
[Snip]
> Somewhat related, is there some mapping of compose test cases to release
> criterion? Or the inverse? Something like "Failures of test case foo,
> bar, and baz may constitute a violation of release criterion qux"?
> [Snip]
Nevermind, I see they'
On 4/13/21 9:39 AM, Ben Cotton wrote:
[Snip]
There must be no SELinux denial notifications or crash notifications on boot of
or during installation from a release-blocking live image, or at first login
after a default install of a release-blocking desktop.
Of course, we can always adjust th
As #action-ed in yesterday's QA meeting[1], I have added the proposal
as-written to the Basic release criteria[2].
> If a utility for creating user accounts and other configuration is configured
> to launch, it must be visible within 10 seconds of the first boot reaching
> the launch point.
The
On Mon, 2021-03-15 at 09:35 -0500, Brandon Nielsen wrote:
> On 3/14/21 10:13 AM, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > In the wake of the BZ 1924808[1] discussion in Thursday's Go/No-Go
> > meeting[2], I am proposing an addition to the Basic Release
> > Criteria[3]. This would go into Post-Install Requirements ->
On 3/15/21 11:57, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 11:13:45AM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
In the wake of the BZ 1924808[1] discussion in Thursday's Go/No-Go
meeting[2], I am proposing an addition to the Basic Release
Criteria[3]. This would go into Post-Install Requirements -> Expected
On 3/15/21 10:45, Ben Cotton wrote:
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 10:41 AM Brandon Nielsen wrote:
Can we also add a "and displayed without error" clause, or maybe
"completes with no visible error"? Something to explicitly capture the
"sad face" bug[0].
[0] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.c
On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 11:13:45AM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> In the wake of the BZ 1924808[1] discussion in Thursday's Go/No-Go
> meeting[2], I am proposing an addition to the Basic Release
> Criteria[3]. This would go into Post-Install Requirements -> Expected
> installed system boot behavior ->
On 3/15/21 9:45 AM, Ben Cotton wrote:
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 10:41 AM Brandon Nielsen wrote:
Can we also add a "and displayed without error" clause, or maybe
"completes with no visible error"? Something to explicitly capture the
"sad face" bug[0].
[0] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.c
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 10:41 AM Brandon Nielsen wrote:
>
> Can we also add a "and displayed without error" clause, or maybe
> "completes with no visible error"? Something to explicitly capture the
> "sad face" bug[0].
>
> [0] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1924908
I thought about
On 3/14/21 10:13 AM, Ben Cotton wrote:
In the wake of the BZ 1924808[1] discussion in Thursday's Go/No-Go
meeting[2], I am proposing an addition to the Basic Release
Criteria[3]. This would go into Post-Install Requirements -> Expected
installed system boot behavior -> First boot utilities (appen
28 matches
Mail list logo
