Re: user switching criterion proposal

On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 3:19 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > Thanks, Adam. That link is much better, and I'm happy to follow your > advice on wording as you're our number one criterion lawyer ;-) > > Here's an updated criterion proposal. I marked adjusted parts with an > asterisk. > > ~~~

Re: user switching criterion proposal

On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 5:56 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > I think we don't need the weasel form in this criterion as we actually > do want to block on user switching *fully working*. So I think I'd > agree with Lukas (and Brandon) that this can be changed to "perform", > but keeping the reference

Re: user switching criterion proposal

On Thu, 2020-05-07 at 10:40 +0200, Kamil Paral wrote: > On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 6:15 PM Patrick O'Callaghan > wrote: > > > On Wed, 2020-05-06 at 17:51 +0200, Kamil Paral wrote: > > > For the purpose of this criterion, user switching doesn't include > > switching > > > between different sessions of

Re: user switching criterion proposal

On Thu, 2020-05-07 at 10:52 +0200, Kamil Paral wrote: > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 8:48 AM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > > > Hello, > > I agree, that user switching as described in this proposal is something > > that should work really well, because it can obviously change the user > > experience in some ca

Re: user switching criterion proposal

On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 1:58 PM Brandon Nielsen wrote: > On 5/12/20 1:19 AM, Kamil Paral wrote: > > On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 5:51 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > >> >> [snip] > > Work? >> The switching mechanism must correctly attempt the requested operation. >> If the operation doesn't work on a subset o

Re: user switching criterion proposal

On 5/12/20 1:19 AM, Kamil Paral wrote: On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 5:51 PM Kamil Paral > wrote: [snip] Work? The switching mechanism must correctly attempt the requested operation. If the operation doesn't work on a subset of graphical drivers, the releas

Re: user switching criterion proposal

On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 5:51 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > Following the previous discussion [1] and the gathered support, here's a > proposal for the user switching criterion. I believe we should put it into > the Final milestone [2]. > > ~ > User switching > > User switching must w

Re: user switching criterion proposal

On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 8:48 AM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > Hello, > I agree, that user switching as described in this proposal is something > that should work really well, because it can obviously change the user > experience in some cases. > I only have a problem with the following statement: > > The

Re: user switching criterion proposal

On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 6:15 PM Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > On Wed, 2020-05-06 at 17:51 +0200, Kamil Paral wrote: > > For the purpose of this criterion, user switching doesn't include > switching > > between different sessions of the *same* user. > > Rather than "doesn't include" I'd suggest "nee

Re: user switching criterion proposal

On Wed, 2020-05-06 at 17:51 +0200, Kamil Paral wrote: > For the purpose of this criterion, user switching doesn't include switching > between different sessions of the *same* user. Rather than "doesn't include" I'd suggest "need not include". Maybe also add wording to suggest this doesn't cover s

user switching criterion proposal

Following the previous discussion [1] and the gathered support, here's a proposal for the user switching criterion. I believe we should put it into the Final milestone [2]. ~ User switching User switching must work using the mechanisms offered (if any) by all release-blocking