Blocker Bug Voting and Conversation

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2012-12-04 at 08:22 -0500, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > Affected Voters:
> >  - Do you vote on blocker status in bug comments?
> 
> If necessary, but I don't like it much. In my experience the
> discussion in the meeting is often very helpful to understand the
> nature of the bug, and it can shift my opinion substantially.
> 
> Also I don't like spamming bugzilla with irrelevant data. It makes the
> whole bug report less readable. 
> 
> > 
> >  - Would you vote on blocker status more often if you could easily
> >  vote
> >    outside of meetings?
> 
> If we are not in a rush, I'd keep everything in the meeting. If we are
> in a rush (like now), I'd move some "obvious" (or controversial, those
> might be good candidates too) items outside of the meeting, but not
> into the bugzilla. An email thread on the test list is much better. It
> can contain long discussion without obfuscating bugzilla. Bugzilla can
> contain just a single comment with a hyperlink to the discussion, so
> that anyone interested can join. Once consensus is reached on the
> list, one of QA guys can update bugzilla status.
> 
> There is one important drawback, and that is the necessity to be
> subscribed to the list.

I think this is an interesting idea, but aside from the drawbacks
someone else noted (blocker voting is not QA-only), I see another: our
current mailing list archive kinda sucks and is a pain to read a long
thread on. If we get the shiny new one Mo is designing this might become
a moot point, but right now I'd rather read even a messy bugzilla report
than a long ML thread via our mail archives.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net