docs-qa March 2014

docs-qa@lists.fedoraproject.org

1 participants
148 discussions

[Bug 1021600] New: Application Installer
by Red Hat Bugzilla 19 Aug '14

19 Aug '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1021600 Bug ID: 1021600 Summary: Application Installer Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Keywords: Tracking Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: pbokoc(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: jreznik(a)redhat.com, mclasen(a)redhat.com, pbokoc(a)redhat.com, rhughes(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 998562, 1002288 Blocks: 1001335, 1001336 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998562 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: Application Installer For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/AppInstaller We will replace the existing gnome-packagekit frontends (gpk-update-viewer and gpk-application) by a new application. --- Additional comment from Jaroslav Reznik on 2013-08-27 11:26:43 EDT --- Application Installer is tracked/still under discussion by FESCo. --- Additional comment from Jaroslav Reznik on 2013-08-28 14:43:51 EDT --- Current status from Change Page: The hawkey backend is available in PackageKit git master. gnome-software is available in git.gnome.org. Neither is in f20 yet. We are aiming for a first gnome-software release by end of August, and will package it asap, then. --- Additional comment from Matthias Clasen on 2013-09-02 13:52:34 EDT --- gnome-software has been built for f20 today --- Additional comment from Jaroslav Reznik on 2013-10-11 04:46:26 EDT --- This message is a reminder that Fedora 20 Accepted Changes 100% Completed Deadline is on 2013-10-15 [1]. All Accepted Changes has to be code complete and ready to be validated in the Beta release (optionally by Fedora QA). Required bug state at this point is ON_QA. As for several System Wide Changes, Beta Change Deadline is a point of contingency plan, all incomplete Changes will be reported to FESCo for 2013-10-16 meeting. In case of any questions, don't hesitate to ask Wrangler (jreznik). [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/20/Schedule --- Additional comment from Jaroslav Reznik on 2013-10-21 09:06:29 EDT --- Change is completed, moving to ON_QA as agreed with the owner. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=998562 [Bug 998562] Application Installer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001335 [Bug 1001335] Application Installer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001336 [Bug 1001336] Application Installer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1002288 [Bug 1002288] Review Request: gnome-software - A software center for GNOME -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1036625] New: Link to docs.redhat.com should properly link to access.redhat.com
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Aug '14

05 Aug '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1036625 Bug ID: 1036625 Summary: Link to docs.redhat.com should properly link to access.redhat.com Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Severity: low Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: rpjday(a)crashcourse.ca QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co In Section 3, Acknowledgements, link to "docs.redhat.com" (correctly) redirects to access.redhat.com, but links should really link directly to the correct page, I think. Not sure if this has already been logged, it's possible there are other links with the same property. rday -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 3

[Bug 1001364] New: Unversioned Docdirs
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Aug '14

05 Aug '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001364 Bug ID: 1001364 Summary: Unversioned Docdirs Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: release-notes Keywords: Tracking Assignee: relnotes(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: jreznik(a)redhat.com, relnotes(a)fedoraproject.org, ville.skytta(a)iki.fi, wb8rcr(a)arrl.net, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 993551 (F20UnversionedDocDirs), 998579 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998579 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: Unversioned Docdirs For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/UnversionedDocdirs Install package specific documentation to an unversioned subdir in /usr/share/doc. Discussion at https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel-announce/2013-July/001195.h… and https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-July/186623.html Please create entries for this Change in the Release Notes. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 1021603] New: Unversioned Docdirs
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Aug '14

05 Aug '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1021603 Bug ID: 1021603 Summary: Unversioned Docdirs Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Keywords: Tracking Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: pbokoc(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: adam(a)spicenitz.org, jreznik(a)redhat.com, pbokoc(a)redhat.com, ville.skytta(a)iki.fi, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 993551 (F20UnversionedDocDirs), 998579 Blocks: 1001364, 1001365 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998579 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: Unversioned Docdirs For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/UnversionedDocdirs Install package specific documentation to an unversioned subdir in /usr/share/doc. --- Additional comment from Adam Goode on 2013-09-25 22:50:18 EDT --- This should be fixed in rawhide. --- Additional comment from Jaroslav Reznik on 2013-10-11 04:46:54 EDT --- This message is a reminder that Fedora 20 Accepted Changes 100% Completed Deadline is on 2013-10-15 [1]. All Accepted Changes has to be code complete and ready to be validated in the Beta release (optionally by Fedora QA). Required bug state at this point is ON_QA. As for several System Wide Changes, Beta Change Deadline is a point of contingency plan, all incomplete Changes will be reported to FESCo for 2013-10-16 meeting. In case of any questions, don't hesitate to ask Wrangler (jreznik). [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/20/Schedule Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993551 [Bug 993551] F20 Unversioned doc dirs tracker bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=998579 [Bug 998579] Unversioned Docdirs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001364 [Bug 1001364] Unversioned Docdirs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001365 [Bug 1001365] Unversioned Docdirs -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 3

[Bug 1021203] New: PDF version of Installation Guide misformatted
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Aug '14

05 Aug '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1021203 Bug ID: 1021203 Summary: PDF version of Installation Guide misformatted Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: ruslan.khafizov(a)gmail.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Description of problem: PDF version of Installation Guide looks unusual. Margins are huge and take 2/3 of page width. Font is quite small and barely readable. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 19 How reproducible: Download document from http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/19/pdf/Installation_Guide/Fedora… Steps to Reproduce: 1. Go to http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/19/pdf/Installation_Guide/Fedora… 2. See. Actual results: pdf document which is hard to read Expected results: pdf document which can be read and printed. Additional info: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 991093] New: Innacurate information about deleting data in 12. Storage and partitioning
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Aug '14

05 Aug '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=991093 Bug ID: 991093 Summary: Innacurate information about deleting data in 12. Storage and partitioning Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: pbokoc(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: oglesbyzm(a)gmail.com, pbokoc(a)redhat.com Below is a copypaste of two e-mails from docs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org explaining the issue. ================================================================================ Mail 1 from Adam Williamson: Someone on the forums kindly pointed out an inaccuracy in the Installation Guide: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/19/html/Installation_Quick_Star… "All data will be erased during installation from the disks you select at this stage. Do not select disks that contain data you want to preserve." This is not correct. It would be correct to say that no data can *possibly* be deleted from any disks you *don't* select at this stage, but it is not true that all data will be removed from disks you *do* select. Suggesting that this is the case prevents people from following lots of common install paths. What actually happens to the data on the selected disks depends on the user's choices at Installation Options and 'custom partitioning' or Reclaim Space. If you go to custom partitioning, basically, you're in complete control of what happens; you can do all sorts of stuff from there, but no data/partitions will be lost unless you explicitly choose for that to happen. If the disk has sufficient unpartitioned space and you just pick the easiest 'install into empty space' path, no existing data will be disturbed, though any existing bootloader in the MBR will be overwritten (this is normal and has always been the case). If you go through Reclaim Space, you get the choice of what existing partitions to delete or resize. ===================================================================== Mail 2 from Chris Murphy: Yeah, the user actually needs to go to some extreme lengths to erase all data on the selected disk. In Custom, it's deleted one partition at a time, with an optional shortcut that popsup offering to delete all related partitions (which still may not be all data on disk). Further, a summary pops up and shows what will be deleted in red text. In Guided, user either must set each partition to be deleted, or click on the disk (make model number) and set it to delete which then shows all partitions being set to delete as well. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1036643] New: Example 3.1 appears to mix references to 32- and 64-bit install DVD isos
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Aug '14

05 Aug '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1036643 Bug ID: 1036643 Summary: Example 3.1 appears to mix references to 32- and 64-bit install DVD isos Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Severity: low Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: rpjday(a)crashcourse.ca QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co In Example 3.1 in the current install guide, the mount command refers to a 64-bit version of the ISO, but the final call to "livecd-iso-to-disk" refers to a 32-bit version of the ISO. Is this deliberate? It seems potentially confusing. rday -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 995886] New: kickstart "repo" suboptions incomplete
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Aug '14

05 Aug '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=995886 Bug ID: 995886 Summary: kickstart "repo" suboptions incomplete Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: stephent98(a)hotmail.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: oglesbyzm(a)gmail.com, pbokoc(a)redhat.com Description of problem: For the kickstart "repo" option, the F19 Installation Guide lists three suboptions: repo --name=<repoid> [--baseurl=<url>| --mirrorlist=<url>] http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/19/html/Installation_Guide/s1-ki… The Anaconda/Kickstart wiki lists nine suboptions: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Anaconda/Kickstart#repo repo --name=<name> [--baseurl=<url>|--mirrorlist=<url>] [options] --name= --baseurl= --mirrorlist= --cost= --excludepkgs= --includepkgs= --proxy=[protocol://][username[:password]@]host[:port] --ignoregroups=true --noverifyssl Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): F19 Installation Guide http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/19/html/Installation_Guide/s1-ki… Anaconda/Kickstart wiki https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Anaconda/Kickstart#repo Additional info: Bug 995526 - regression: --cost ignored in kickstart file -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 982656] New: A couple of suggestions for 9.17. Installation Complete
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Aug '14

05 Aug '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=982656 Bug ID: 982656 Summary: A couple of suggestions for 9.17. Installation Complete Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Keywords: Documentation Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: pkovar(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: oglesbyzm(a)gmail.com, pbokoc(a)redhat.com Hey Petr, Just a couple of suggestions for section 9.17. Installation Complete "Now that you have configured the remaining settings, your Fedora installation is now complete!" --> "Now that you have configured the remaining settings, your Fedora installation is complete." "9.17.1. Initial Setup in GNOME" --> GNOME Initial Setup "haven't" --> "have not" "The Initial Setup application is only available for GNOME." This might need some rewording since we now have two initial setup apps in Fedora (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NewFirstboot, https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/InitialExperience) that do almost the same thing, but target different DEs. "create an user account" --> "create a user account" "After you are finished configuring" --> "After you have finished configuring" "On the first login, the Gnome Help application will automatically open" The application is called Yelp, not Gnome Help. However, you probably just want to mention that "GNOME Help will automatically open...". "Figure 9.40. Language selection in Gnome Initial Setup" --> "Language selection in GNOME Initial Setup" -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 904083] New: Storage Administration Guide is obsolete or not?
by Red Hat Bugzilla 24 Jul '14

24 Jul '14

Product: Fedora Documentation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904083 Bug ID: 904083 Summary: Storage Administration Guide is obsolete or not? Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: storage-administration-guide Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Reporter: q2dg(a)yahoo.es I've seen in http://docs.fedoraproject.org that last version of "Storage Administration Guide" is for Fedora 14. It's more than two years ago!! I don't know if this fact is due to this guide doesn't need any update or if it's due to a lack of love from editors. I want to notify this in Bugzilla to remember this situation, but I'm not sure it is really a bug... Could you tell me the reason of this abandonment? Thanks!! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 5

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

docs-qa March 2014