[Thincrust-devel] Fedora Feature Request Appliance Building

[Bryan Kearney]

Jon Stanley wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 5:30 PM, David Huff <dhuff at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
>> I have combined the two feature request in to one. Any comments before I
>> submit to FeatureWrangler for approval:
> 
> Being that I'm on FESCo who has to approve this, let me mention my
> comments here first :)
> 
> I'm a little unclear as to whether this is a spin, or a toolchain to
> support creating spins based on a minimal Fedora - you mention new
> additions to Fedora, but also needing space on spins.fp.o? I'm
> slightly confused :)

"Yes" :). Today, it appears that a Spin == a  live cd. So, this feature 
is really a set of tools to create appliances. We would like to see 
these hosted along with the live-cds as valid types of spins.

> 
> The test plan is a little weak - I'm also in Fedora QA. :). I'm not
> sure what "work with Fedora QA to ensure proper coverage" means :). We
> don't know anything about your feature, so how are we supposed to know
> what coverage is proper? :). With that said, it appears that since
> you're creating bootable Fedora images, you're talking about the
> release test plan. Unfortunately, with our testcase management system
> being forever legal blocked :(, all that I can do is point you to what
> we've got for F10Alpha, which is on the wiki and not nearly as
> polished as we'd like:
> 
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/TestResults/Fedora10Install/Alpha

David:

perhaps we add the following to the test cases:
1) Build image, boot on kvm via virt-image.
2) Build image, boot on F9 kvm via firt image (repeat for X flavors of 
Fedora)
3) Build image, boot on VMware.

In all cases the expected results are really "It boots, we can log in"


> 
> I guess we decide which (if any) of that is actually applicable to you.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Thincrust-devel mailing list
> Thincrust-devel at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/thincrust-devel