[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Fedora 12 QA retrospective - feedback needed



On 11/25/2009 09:54 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 13:35 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 16:20 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:

> From my perspective, the two main avenues to a new Fedora release are
the live installer and preupgrade, and those two should get all the
attention they can get.
I'd say the main problem with preupgrade testing is that, given the
fairly limited resources QA has, it's rather hard for us to recreate the
infinite configurations people in the real world will try to run
preupgrade on. It's inherently a nightmare of complexity. We can
certainly try and do _better_ testing than we currently do, though.
Sure you can't hope to test a full matrix, but that is just as much the
case for anaconda... yet the anaconda test matrix looks a lot more
complete than the upgrade one. Anyway, I don't want to make it sound
like the upgrade situation is mainly a QA problem - it is
first-and-foremost a maintainership problem; we must get out of the
situation that one of the two main avenues to the next release is wwoods
weekend project - of course, the other one being the unloved stepchild
of the installer team is not exactly perfect either...


FEI we are already improving preupgrade's QA process ( https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/30 )

Afaik we dont official support upgrading between releases hence i'm not sure how high on the priority list upgrading is with Will and Team Anaconda and now "to shock you all" even with us...

If we have started to official support upgrading between release then we have to make dam sure user customization/configuration do not get overwritten and or lost in the process which means for example for the Gnome desktop spin no more "gconftool-2 --type int --set" workarounds for users to get their "old" behavior back.

How many backwards compatibility test cases have we receive from maintainers? ( afaik 0 )

How well have they informed us or the support team if a changes they have made breaks current behavior and or is backward incompatible heck hell do they even bother to inform us or the support team at all?

200 MiB boot partition used to be enough during preupgrades and I suspect the new initramfs might be the reason why it needs to be increased and I'm pretty sure Will and Team Anaconda gladly take any help they can get on improving preupgrading between releases.

JBG


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]