On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 10:21:11AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
<snip>
I propose we re-word the Alpha criterion to:
"When installing with a release-blocking dedicated installer image, the installer must be able to install the default package set."
and add a Beta criterion:
"When installing with a release-blocking dedicated installer image, the default package set must be correct."
with an explanatory note that 'correct' means the package set intended by the group responsible for the image - Product WG, FESCo or whoever.
+1 to the rewording.
I'm not sure whether we need a requirement for non-default package sets. Note that the case for offline media is already covered by Alpha criterion "No broken packages":
"There must be no errors in any package on the release-blocking images which cause the package to fail to install."
network installs using updates media don't really need to block on package set issues, as they can be fixed. That leaves the question of whether we'd want to block the release if, say, there was a bug which meant that if you tried to netinst KDE without the updates repos enabled, it failed. What do folks think about that?
I'd be for blocking on a broken netinst (like your example), but if the repos are the same used for image creation this shouldn't really be an issue, right? (Yeah, I know I used the "S" word :p ) AIUI things would break in other places if this particular issue was to come up. Is my understanding correct?