|
Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing |
| Summary: | Misleading message when skipping registration on the 'Full' media | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [SUSE Linux Enterprise Server] Public Beta SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 SP2 | Reporter: | Christoph Wickert <cwickert> |
| Component: | Installer | Assignee: | YaST Team <yast-internal> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | E-mail List <qa-bugs> |
| Severity: | Normal | ||
| Priority: | P3 - Medium | CC: | jsrain, lslezak |
| Version: | Public RC1 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Other | ||
| OS: | Other | ||
| URL: | https://trello.com/c/Uzl0Ye2Q | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Found By: | Documentation | Services Priority: | |
| Business Priority: | Blocker: | --- | |
| Marketing QA Status: | --- | IT Deployment: | --- |
|
Description
Christoph Wickert
2020-03-26 16:01:52 UTC
Even though this is trivial, it ould be nice to get this fixed in SP2 GA. Thanks for the report! And the pull request! One complication is that changes like this will make the text appear untranslated. Since we would delete a sentence, it might be fixed even without engaging the translators, but still it would be more work than just that PR. Also, we must make sure that the message is not used in contexts where the deleted sentence would be in fact needed. Lada, can you please check? (BTW the last change to that code was https://github.com/yast/yast-registration/pull/461 ) Would be indeed good to get it in. I do not think that the "configure access to packages medium" wording is actually wrong. If it was "Packages DVD" or similar (note the capitalization) than it would be incorrect as we dropped the Packages medium. The next step on the Full medium is the module/extension dialog, so it is correct. You can think of "packages medium" as a generic term for any medium containing packages. And that's definitely true for the Full medium. If we still want to change the wording I'd postpone it for SP3, it's a minor issue and we should not break the translations for SP2. (In reply to Ladislav Slezák from comment #5) > I do not think that the "configure access to packages medium" wording is > actually wrong. > > If it was "Packages DVD" or similar (note the capitalization) than it would > be incorrect as we dropped the Packages medium. > > The next step on the Full medium is the module/extension dialog, so it is > correct. You can think of "packages medium" as a generic term for any medium > containing packages. And that's definitely true for the Full medium. No. The next step is "Extension and Module Selection", see https://susedoc.github.io/doc-sle/master/html/SLES-installquick/#sec-sle-installquick-install-register and the following section. The repos on the 'Full' medium are configured automatically and there is no need to configure any additional media/repos unless you want additional add-ons, but that's a different story. The "Add On Product" dialog comes after "Extension and Module Selection". Now compare that to SP1: https://susedoc.github.io/doc-sle/SLE15SP1/html/SLES-installquick/#sec-sle-installquick-install-offline-regisration There, the next step after skipping the registration is the "Add On Product" dialog, and only after you configured the additional 'Packages' DVD as addon-repo, you can select extensions and modules. > If we still want to change the wording I'd postpone it for SP3, it's a minor > issue and we should not break the translations for SP2. I see your point with the string freeze, however I wonder (In reply to Martin Vidner from comment #3) > Since we would delete a sentence, it might be fixed even without engaging > the translators, but still it would be more work than just that PR. Ok, it we did a less invasive change and only delete that one sentence, how much effort would it be to update the translation? Are we sure we can do this without the translators? Note that we also need to fix ./test/base_system_registration_dialog_test.rb (I did not think of this). At this point, I agree we should probably postpone this to after the SP2 release. (but I wonder how this slipped through QA in the context of at least two epics) (In reply to Christoph Wickert from comment #7) > (but I wonder how this slipped through QA in the context of at > least two epics) Because testing by real humans and writing automated tests are two different things. openQA can't really read an understand any messages. openQA can't tell if a text makes sense. Yes, it's great that we have automated testing, but we must never give up on real manual testing especially of the edge cases. (In reply to Lukas Ocilka from comment #8) > (In reply to Christoph Wickert from comment #7) > > (but I wonder how this slipped through QA in the context of at > > least two epics) > > Because testing by real humans and writing automated tests are two different > things. openQA can't really read an understand any messages. openQA can't > tell > if a text makes sense. Yes, it's great that we have automated testing, but > we must never give up on real manual testing especially of the edge cases. On the other hand: With every Beta or RC testing by muman is performed (only releases called "Snapshot X" are openQA-only). Given Christopher's agreement to postpone: I agree. IMO we should not only remove the sentence, but rather replace it with a proper explanation. Reducing to P3, please, process this bug for SP3. I see my PR was merged. Can we close this bug now or is there something let to do (translations, release, …)? Let's close :) thx |