On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 11:41 AM, Robie Basak
<email address hidden> wrote:
> 10:41 <rbasak> infinity, dannf: for bug 1633629, shouldn't we be doing
> some testing of other architectures to make sure that we aren't
> regressing something?
Robie,
Well, it's certainly hard to argue for *less* testing though - a test
on the most popular architecture seems reasonable. I went ahead and
tested a d-i mini.iso install from proposed on an amd64 VM via
virt-manager and observed no regressions. Note that the GA d-i remains
available/usable after updates, so any regressions on other
architectures will have that as a fallback option.
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 11:41 AM, Robie Basak
<email address hidden> wrote:
> 10:41 <rbasak> infinity, dannf: for bug 1633629, shouldn't we be doing
> some testing of other architectures to make sure that we aren't
> regressing something?
Robie,
Well, it's certainly hard to argue for *less* testing though - a test
on the most popular architecture seems reasonable. I went ahead and
tested a d-i mini.iso install from proposed on an amd64 VM via
virt-manager and observed no regressions. Note that the GA d-i remains
available/usable after updates, so any regressions on other
architectures will have that as a fallback option.
-dann