Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

On Thu, 2016-10-27 at 06:56 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote: > Just to have an idea, say that we have both VM* columns fully covered > by OpenQA, but for DVD columns with have just a single BIOS+UEFI > result for Workstation Live. Would that be sufficient for Beta? What > do we consider "a reasonable

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

> So after some further consideration I think I'm on board with this, and > it turned out not to be too hard to implement. I have updated the draft > test case: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_Testcase_Boot_default_install > > so it now basically says 'you can run any kind

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > Yes, that was the case with the F21 syslinux bug - > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1148087 - which is why it > took us a while to catch it. Reading that and the syslinux change log, I'm guessing

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > So after some further consideration I think I'm on board with this, and > it turned out not to be too hard to implement. I have updated the draft > test case: > >

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

On Tue, 2016-10-18 at 07:54 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote: > OK, you're right that there are some cases which could bypass our > testing. That's why I assumed this idea might not fly, even though > I'd personally have no problem to focus on "reasonable coverage" > instead of full coverage. But there

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

> > The new matrix version seems to be more time consuming that the > > previous version. > > In fact, the count of 'empty spaces' is identical in both versions. In > the old version there were 24 empty spaces that humans were *supposed* > to be filling in (though this wasn't always really

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 12:41 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: > >> U.S. rural areas? :-D > > I'm pretty rural, and even I have good internet. Maybe we need to > redefine "rural" to be independent of physicality :-) Yes it was sort of a ding on the state of affairs in the U.S. rather than

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 6:47 AM, Richard Ryniker wrote: >>an optical specific Live Workstation spin > > Sounds like the proper category: will not block a regular Fedora release, > will not consume test resources for primary Fedora deliverables, and will > provide a focus for

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

>an optical specific Live Workstation spin Sounds like the proper category: will not block a regular Fedora release, will not consume test resources for primary Fedora deliverables, and will provide a focus for those with some stake in optical media. While lack of community to support an

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 10:00:05PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > > Based on feedback from Ambassadors, DVD images may still be useful > > giveaways in regions with less access to bandwidth. I'm not sure what > > to do about that. > U.S. rural areas? :-D Possibly, although I think most people would

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > Based on feedback from Ambassadors, DVD images may still be useful > giveaways in regions with less access to bandwidth. I'm not sure what > to do about that. U.S. rural areas? :-D Are we talking about the DVDs

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 08:58:43AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > Well, that's not the only consideration though. There's two other > factors I can think of: > 1) Are there still cases where an admin would want to use optical media > on a machine that *could* boot via USB, for legitimate reasons?

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 12:57:30PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > Maybe it's practical to only support optical boot on either Lives or > netinstalls (and by extension server DVD). I'd say block on > netinstalls, just becase those can fit on either a DVD or CD, and > desktops and servers are more

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 9:42 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 01:08:13PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: >> explicit instructions for all three media types we care about (virtual >> disc attached to a VM, real optical disc in a real machine, real USB >>

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

On Mon, 2016-10-10 at 11:42 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 01:08:13PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > explicit instructions for all three media types we care about (virtual > > disc attached to a VM, real optical disc in a real machine, real USB > > stick in a real

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 01:08:13PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > explicit instructions for all three media types we care about (virtual > disc attached to a VM, real optical disc in a real machine, real USB > stick in a real machine), we ditch the USB test matrices entirely, and I think we

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

> Hi folks! Sending this to devel@ as well as test@ as there's been some > relevant discussion there recently. We've been kicking around a couple > of issues lately: > > 1. Exactly what do we need to test and block on, in terms of writing > images to USB sticks? > > 2. 'Default boot and install'

Re: Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > Hi folks! Sending this to devel@ as well as test@ as there's been some > relevant discussion there recently. We've been kicking around a couple > of issues lately: > > 1. Exactly what do we need to test and block

Installation validation test change proposal: merge USB tests into 'default boot and install', add more environment columns

Hi folks! Sending this to devel@ as well as test@ as there's been some relevant discussion there recently. We've been kicking around a couple of issues lately: 1. Exactly what do we need to test and block on, in terms of writing images to USB sticks? 2. 'Default boot and install' table was