Release criteria proposals: Edition branding and installer customizations

[Adam Williamson]

sgallagh and I both noticed that the release criteria do not currently
include any requirements around Edition branding or installer
customizations. We think they probably should. Thus, we're proposing
the following new criteria. They would be in a new section for each
page, something like "Edition requirements" or something like that,
probably with a brief explanation of what "Editions" are outside of any
specific criterion text.

For Beta:

== Installer customization ==

For each Edition, all significant functional customization of installer
behavior that are intended to be a part of that Edition must take
effect on that Edition's installable release-blocking images.

footnote: 'Significant functional?': significant functional
customization would usually include, for e.g., changes to the default
filesystem and firewall configuration. The WG or SIG responsible for
each Edition has the definitive say on what is or is not considered a
'significant functional customization' for that Edition.

For Final:

== Self-identification ==

For each Edition, the installer must be clearly identified as that
Edition in all of that Edition's installable release-blocking images.
Also, for any deployment of that Edition in accordance with the rest of
these criteria, the relevant fields in {{filename|/etc/os-release}}
must include the correct Edition name.

Thoughts, comments, suggestions, flames? Thanks!
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2018-01-05 at 11:35 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  sgallagh and I both noticed that the release criteria do not
> currently
>  include any requirements around Edition branding or installer
>  customizations. We think they probably should. Thus, we're proposing
>  the following new criteria. They would be in a new section for each
>  page, something like "Edition requirements" or something like that,
>  probably with a brief explanation of what "Editions" are outside of any
>  specific criterion text.
>  
>  For Beta:
>  
>  == Installer customization ==
>  
>  For each Edition, all significant functional customization of installer
>  behavior that are intended to be a part of that Edition must take
>  effect on that Edition's installable release-blocking images.
>  
>  footnote: 'Significant functional?': significant functional
>  customization would usually include, for e.g., changes to the default
>  filesystem and firewall configuration. 
edit: firewall configuration isn't part of installer customization, in
fact. So let's drop that from the proposal and just leave 'changes to
the default filesystem'.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2018-01-05 at 11:35 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  sgallagh and I both noticed that the release criteria do not
> currently
>  include any requirements around Edition branding or installer
>  customizations. We think they probably should. Thus, we're proposing
>  the following new criteria. They would be in a new section for each
>  page, something like "Edition requirements" or something like that,
>  probably with a brief explanation of what "Editions" are outside of any
>  specific criterion text. 
Since there were no objections to this, I've gone ahead and made the
changes as proposed. I also added test cases for both criteria:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Server_filesystem_default
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_base_edition_self_identification

and added them to the Server and Base matrices respectively.

Thanks!
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net