Blockers via flags?

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 10:37 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 11:54 -0400, James Laska wrote:
> > 
> > I like the idea of having multiple flags, however am concerned that it
> > is a significant documentation/training challenge.
> > 
> > Is there benefit in rolling this out in phases?  Part#1 would involve
> > adding only a 'blocker' flag to allow for improved query and 3 blocker
> > request states (requested, accepted, rejected).  Part#2 would add the
> > team specific blockers (devel, releng and qa) and an automated mechanism
> > to approve/reject 'blocker' requests based on these new flags. 
> 
> In my opinion, the training would be fairly light, and doing it in
> phases wouldn't necessarily help here.

> Doing it in phases removes one of the biggest advantages to me, the ease
> of doing this work in an asynchronous mode.  My goal is to reduce the
> amount of time we spend in those meetings, and to increase clarity for
> maintainers and testers as to which bugs are actually blockers.  A 50%
> reduction in goals in order to do it in phases doesn't sit well with me
> (:

+1. If we're going to do it, just do it. Stretching things out only
embiggens the pain. =)
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net