Bug 1221920
| Summary: | release notes are missing on Workstation image | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Kamil Páral <kparal> |
| Component: | distribution | Assignee: | Václav Pavlín <vpavlin> |
| Status: | CLOSED EOL | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 22 | CC: | awilliam, dennis, jreznik, kalevlember, mclasen, pschindl, robatino, sgallagh |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | RejectedBlocker | ||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2016-07-19 14:06:28 UTC | Type: | Bug |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Kamil Páral
2015-05-15 09:14:32 UTC
As an interesting piece of information, fedora release notes were not included even in Fedora 21 Workstation Live. So it's not a recent "regression". It was an intentional F21 change to not ship the release notes, and nothing has changed in that area between F21 and F22 as far as I know. As for linking to the release notes from getting-started docs, I don't know if it's planned or not. But it's highly unlikely to materialize in time for F22, so my recommendation would be to update the criteria. Especially considering that we've already shipped F21 without release notes and it passed the release validation back then. It was probably an oversight. If not shipping them is intentional, we can exempt Workstation from the criterion (it's not really meant to be prescriptive), though I think it's a shame if Workstation doesn't provide any clear reference to the document. It'd be nice if it was the default Document in Documents, for instance... -1 blocker, to be honest - I'd remove this criterion for all deliverables. Online documentation/release notes are more flexible but I agree having pointer to release notes is desirable. Yeah, -1 blocker for F22. We can decide on new criteria for F23. If we're asking for ponies, I'd love to see an extension for Firefox that would cache the release notes and other documentation locally if the server is unavailable. This would be much more reliable than shipping the documentation in packages (and easier to keep updated). Discussed at today's blocker review meeting [1]. This bug was rejected as blocker: This was an intentional change and also the state of F21. Criteria to be amended before F23. [1] http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-blocker-review/2015-05-18 Here's a QA ticket to amend said criterion: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/471 Fedora 22 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2016-07-19. Fedora 22 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed. |