#650 mark Testcase_partitioning_*_standard_partition_ext3 as Optional
Closed: Fixed 4 years ago by kparal. Opened 4 years ago by kparal.

We have now new btrfs testcases, a standard partition + ext4 testcases, and a soon-to-be-coming standard partitition + lvm + ext4 testcases from #642, as visible in:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Template:Installation_test_matrix#Custom_storage_configuration
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Template:Installation_test_matrix#Advanced_custom_storage_configuration

I feel that we now have a decent coverage of all the most important partitioning schemes.

I want to propose to mark Testcase_partitioning_custom_standard_partition_ext3 and Testcase_partitioning_blivet_standard_partition_ext3 in those matrices as Optional (instead of Final). Even though it is covered by a Final criterion, I feel that ext3 is now a niche choice and a crushing majority of people who want ext will pick ext4. For that reason I'd make testing ext3 just optional for us, even though it still blocks according to the criteria.

Thoughts?


Metadata Update from @kparal:
- Issue assigned to kparal

4 years ago

I m +1 for the proposed change

After thinking more about it, I would perhaps even go even further and remove those ext3 testcases from the validation matrix completely. We can still use them e.g. for a Storage test day, but I think ext3 is in a similar spot as ext2 nowadays. While some people might select it, it's a complete corner case and I don't think we need to stuff our matrices with it. We don't have a testcase for ext2 either.

ping @adamwill

I am +1 to at least making these testcases optional, if not removing them completely. Actually, you could say I am +1 to removing them completely based off @kparal's comment above. With the state of the ext4/xfs/lvm/btrfs testcases, I personally see the inclusion of the ext3 testcases as dubious.

So, I dropped the testcases:
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AInstallation_test_matrix&type=revision&diff=592790&oldid=592447

Ping @adamwill @lruzicka, because OpenQA might complain (I'd personally drop the tests in OpenQA as well, and devote the processing power to a different storage testcase. We have quite a few new ones now).

Metadata Update from @kparal:
- Issue close_status updated to: Fixed
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

4 years ago

I dropped it from openQA now. Sorry, didn't notice the ticket.

Log in to comment on this ticket.

Metadata