Hi,
Maybe for the next QA meeting agenda there can be a Fedora Media Writer (Live USB Creator) status update? This is slated to be the primary downloadable for Fedora 24. But the change write-up doesn't specifically say what the go/no-go metric or date is for the change.
My 2 cents is it should be the primary download for Beta release, and if that's not possible then push it to Fedora 25. And also what are the minimum acceptable deliverables? Fedora 22 and 23 probably? How many versions of Windows? 7, 8, 10? And then OS X at all? At least there's a fallback on OS X, dd exists there.
And can the web site deliver the writer binary based on browser platform? Is that reliable?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310542 https://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/LUCasPrimaryDownloadable
On Tue, 2016-03-29 at 19:06 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
Hi,
Maybe for the next QA meeting agenda there can be a Fedora Media Writer (Live USB Creator) status update? This is slated to be the primary downloadable for Fedora 24. But the change write-up doesn't specifically say what the go/no-go metric or date is for the change.
My 2 cents is it should be the primary download for Beta release, and if that's not possible then push it to Fedora 25. And also what are the minimum acceptable deliverables? Fedora 22 and 23 probably? How many versions of Windows? 7, 8, 10? And then OS X at all? At least there's a fallback on OS X, dd exists there.
Yeah, this is a good idea indeed - it's an important Change that we haven't really checked in on. Thanks for the suggestion. I'll try and remember to include it, yell at me if I don't :)
On 03/29/2016 06:48 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2016-03-29 at 19:06 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
Hi,
Maybe for the next QA meeting agenda there can be a Fedora Media Writer (Live USB Creator) status update? This is slated to be the primary downloadable for Fedora 24. But the change write-up doesn't specifically say what the go/no-go metric or date is for the change.
My 2 cents is it should be the primary download for Beta release, and if that's not possible then push it to Fedora 25. And also what are the minimum acceptable deliverables? Fedora 22 and 23 probably? How many versions of Windows? 7, 8, 10? And then OS X at all? At least there's a fallback on OS X, dd exists there.
Yeah, this is a good idea indeed - it's an important Change that we haven't really checked in on. Thanks for the suggestion. I'll try and remember to include it, yell at me if I don't :)
I suggest that the existing GUI interface is fine but should: 1) default to (X) dd (overwrite) mode and have a ( )reset-mbr checkbox to replace of the old non-working persistence default. 2) It would be nice to add the f24 alpha and beta builds to the listing of downloadable .iso's as they are voted for go/no-go . 3) The default download directory in now / ;it should be the users /download direcory for consistency.
Tom Gilliard satellit
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 7:56 PM, Thomas Gilliard satellitgo@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/29/2016 06:48 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2016-03-29 at 19:06 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
Hi,
Maybe for the next QA meeting agenda there can be a Fedora Media Writer (Live USB Creator) status update? This is slated to be the primary downloadable for Fedora 24. But the change write-up doesn't specifically say what the go/no-go metric or date is for the change.
My 2 cents is it should be the primary download for Beta release, and if that's not possible then push it to Fedora 25. And also what are the minimum acceptable deliverables? Fedora 22 and 23 probably? How many versions of Windows? 7, 8, 10? And then OS X at all? At least there's a fallback on OS X, dd exists there.
Yeah, this is a good idea indeed - it's an important Change that we haven't really checked in on. Thanks for the suggestion. I'll try and remember to include it, yell at me if I don't :)
I suggest that the existing GUI interface is fine but should:
- default to (X) dd (overwrite) mode and have a ( )reset-mbr checkbox to
replace of the old non-working persistence default. 2) It would be nice to add the f24 alpha and beta builds to the listing of downloadable .iso's as they are voted for go/no-go . 3) The default download directory in now / ;it should be the users /download direcory for consistency.
This is quite the rebuild, I'm not even sure why it's keeping the same versioning.
1. is already the case in 3.91.0 which is currently in koji but needs qt5-qtgraphicaleffects.x86_64 installed first or it crashes. (kparal already filed a bug for that.)
2. Is a good point how we actually test the integrated downloading, which right now is pinned to Fedora 23 (maybe also 22). Add onto this whether the image sha256 hash is checked by the tool? Hard to test that.
3. / ? Ick. I think retesting this new version is in order, I agree it should go in ~/Downloads.
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 07:06:11PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
My 2 cents is it should be the primary download for Beta release, and if that's not possible then push it to Fedora 25. And also what are
Yeah, I agree. We'll need at least a round of testing like that *somewhere*, and if not beta, then it's gotta be the next beta.
the minimum acceptable deliverables? Fedora 22 and 23 probably? How many versions of Windows? 7, 8, 10? And then OS X at all? At least there's a fallback on OS X, dd exists there.
I think we want it on Windows 7+ and at least the most recent couple of versions of OS X. But if we don't have one, I don't think that should be a blocker — we can just offer it where available, right?
For Fedora Workstation, can we kick this over to GNOME Software, or should it be actually a separate, standalone download? What about with other spins or non-edition Fedora running GNOME?
And can the web site deliver the writer binary based on browser platform? Is that reliable?
I think it's good enough, as long as we do the "Download the Fedora media creator for another platform...." thing as well.
On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 12:07 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 07:06:11PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
My 2 cents is it should be the primary download for Beta release, and if that's not possible then push it to Fedora 25. And also what are
Yeah, I agree. We'll need at least a round of testing like that *somewhere*, and if not beta, then it's gotta be the next beta.
the minimum acceptable deliverables? Fedora 22 and 23 probably? How many versions of Windows? 7, 8, 10? And then OS X at all? At least there's a fallback on OS X, dd exists there.
I think we want it on Windows 7+ and at least the most recent couple of versions of OS X. But if we don't have one, I don't think that should be a blocker — we can just offer it where available, right?
Well I think the issue is this idea of it being the 'primary deliverable' - the messaging gets a bit confusing if we have to say "This is the thing you should download and this is how you use it! Oh, unless you're running (FOO OS) in which case you have to download this totally other thing and use it this totally different way..."
For Fedora Workstation, can we kick this over to GNOME Software, or should it be actually a separate, standalone download? What about with other spins or non-edition Fedora running GNOME?
That's another thing that needs clarifying, I think - what the download links will do exactly for Linux users.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 09:23:22AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
I think we want it on Windows 7+ and at least the most recent couple of versions of OS X. But if we don't have one, I don't think that should be a blocker — we can just offer it where available, right?
Well I think the issue is this idea of it being the 'primary deliverable' - the messaging gets a bit confusing if we have to say "This is the thing you should download and this is how you use it! Oh, unless you're running (FOO OS) in which case you have to download this totally other thing and use it this totally different way..."
Yeah, good point. "Primary" should at least cover most people hitting the site. Smooge is running historical web statistics now and we should shortly be able to answer better what OSes people are visiting with currently.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 01:32:13PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
Yeah, good point. "Primary" should at least cover most people hitting the site. Smooge is running historical web statistics now and we should shortly be able to answer better what OSes people are visiting with currently.
And by "shortly", I mean "now!". Thanks, Smooge.
Of course, this report is everyone hitting http://getfedora.org — we _could_ do more extensive filtering on just Workstation downloads, but I think it's close enough (and Smooge is already doing all sorts of crazy special requests). For 2016 thus far, the basics are:
Windows: 61.8% Linux: 26.3% Mac OS: 6.7%
with specific highlights:
Windows 7: 30.9% Windows 10: 17.3% Windows 8.x: 6.7% Windows XP: 5.6% Unknown Linux: 17.9% (user agents identifying specific OS apparently not common enough to be helpful) Google Android: 7.5% <-- uh, hmmmm. OS X 10.11: 4.1% OS X 10.10: 1.3%
So, Windows 7 plus Windows 10 gets us to almost 50%. I'm actually surprised OS X is so low — lower than Android! (FWIW, Apple iOS is at 1.5% total, with 1.1% from phones and 0.4% from iPads.)
Note:
1-) Fedora-KDE-Live-x86_64-24_Alpha-7.iso already has the new interface for liveusb-creator installed. 2-)"Custom OS" crashes: when [select live iso] is selected "QWidget: Cannot create a QWidget without QApplication Aborted (core dumped)" Thus any test .iso's cannot be accessed (ie: F24 Alpha7) 3-)fedora 23 are the only 32 and 64 bit .iso's available 4-)"---" is all that indicates other spins are available
I think that is a non-obvious way to display these spins
Tom Gilliard satellt
On 03/30/2016 09:23 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 12:07 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 07:06:11PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
My 2 cents is it should be the primary download for Beta release, and if that's not possible then push it to Fedora 25. And also what are
Yeah, I agree. We'll need at least a round of testing like that *somewhere*, and if not beta, then it's gotta be the next beta.
the minimum acceptable deliverables? Fedora 22 and 23 probably? How many versions of Windows? 7, 8, 10? And then OS X at all? At least there's a fallback on OS X, dd exists there.
I think we want it on Windows 7+ and at least the most recent couple of versions of OS X. But if we don't have one, I don't think that should be a blocker — we can just offer it where available, right?
Well I think the issue is this idea of it being the 'primary deliverable' - the messaging gets a bit confusing if we have to say "This is the thing you should download and this is how you use it! Oh, unless you're running (FOO OS) in which case you have to download this totally other thing and use it this totally different way..."
For Fedora Workstation, can we kick this over to GNOME Software, or should it be actually a separate, standalone download? What about with other spins or non-edition Fedora running GNOME?
That's another thing that needs clarifying, I think - what the download links will do exactly for Linux users.
On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 12:07 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
For Fedora Workstation, can we kick this over to GNOME Software, or should it be actually a separate, standalone download? What about with other spins or non-edition Fedora running GNOME?
Can you clarify what "kick this over to GNOME software" means ? Do you mean:
a) Can GNOME software be an installer as well ? or b) Can GNOME software install live-usb-creator ?
I think the answers would be a) no and b) yes, but whats the point ?
On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 14:16 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 12:07 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
For Fedora Workstation, can we kick this over to GNOME Software, or should it be actually a separate, standalone download? What about with other spins or non-edition Fedora running GNOME?
Can you clarify what "kick this over to GNOME software" means ? Do you mean:
a) Can GNOME software be an installer as well ? or b) Can GNOME software install live-usb-creator ?
I think the answers would be a) no and b) yes, but whats the point ?
The way I understood it, the question to ask yourself is this: what happens if I'm running Fedora 23 and I go to getfedora.org to download Fedora 24 Workstation?
It would seem a bit strange to give me a tarball download, for instance. Presumably it should be set up so the download link causes the liveusb-creator package (or whatever it gets renamed to) to be installed the 'proper' way.
It would also, I guess, be good in this situation to provide some information on upgrading, in case that's what I wanted to do.
On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 11:52 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
The way I understood it, the question to ask yourself is this: what happens if I'm running Fedora 23 and I go to getfedora.org to download Fedora 24 Workstation?
It would seem a bit strange to give me a tarball download, for instance. Presumably it should be set up so the download link causes the liveusb-creator package (or whatever it gets renamed to) to be installed the 'proper' way.
It would also, I guess, be good in this situation to provide some information on upgrading, in case that's what I wanted to do.
Ah, I see. I believe the primary target for live-usb-creator is people who are not using fedora yet (I hear there's still some of those out there...).
Even with traditional live images on the getfedora page, it is a bit strange for a Fedora user to go there and download an .iso, isn't it ? Since downloading the .iso is not really the preferred way to upgrade your system either...
Starting with F23->F24, we will be offering those users to upgrade their system in GNOME software.
Maybe the getfedora page could have a
"Already using Fedora and looking for newer stuff ?"
section that talks about how to upgrade your system or how to try a new Fedora release in a VM or with a usb stick ?
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 03:08:34PM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
Ah, I see. I believe the primary target for live-usb-creator is people who are not using fedora yet (I hear there's still some of those out there...).
There's also the case of making install media to use on another system or to give to a friend or coworker.
On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 15:08 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 11:52 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
The way I understood it, the question to ask yourself is this: what happens if I'm running Fedora 23 and I go to getfedora.org to download Fedora 24 Workstation?
It would seem a bit strange to give me a tarball download, for instance. Presumably it should be set up so the download link causes the liveusb-creator package (or whatever it gets renamed to) to be installed the 'proper' way.
It would also, I guess, be good in this situation to provide some information on upgrading, in case that's what I wanted to do.
Ah, I see. I believe the primary target for live-usb-creator is people who are not using fedora yet (I hear there's still some of those out there...).
Well, sure, but the question is not 'who is liveusb-creator targeting?' but 'what should people who hit getfedora.org from Fedora see?'
So long as we just give out .iso files and some links to instructions on what to do with them, it's not really a problem. But with the idea that we should instead give out liveusb-creator, it becomes a problem to be solved. Should we provide Fedora users with a button that magically installs liveusb-creator properly? Or do...something else?
Even with traditional live images on the getfedora page, it is a bit strange for a Fedora user to go there and download an .iso, isn't it ? Since downloading the .iso is not really the preferred way to upgrade your system either...
Well, not necessarily: it depends if they're going there to upgrade the system they're browsing from, or if they want to install on some *other* system. In an ideal world I'd suggest we should handle both cases nicely, but I'm not the one who has to do the coding and the web design. ;)
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 11:52:47AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
It would seem a bit strange to give me a tarball download, for instance. Presumably it should be set up so the download link causes the liveusb-creator package (or whatever it gets renamed to) to be installed the 'proper' way.
Yes, that's what I meant. Thanks for translating!
It would also, I guess, be good in this situation to provide some information on upgrading, in case that's what I wanted to do.
Yeah, that too.
-
Adam Williamson -
Chris Murphy -
Matthew Miller -
Matthias Clasen -
Thomas Gilliard