Fwd: F13 Schedule Proposal--please RESPOND

[James Laska]

On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 13:54 -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 14:14 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > 
> > 1) Freeze
> > 
> > 2) Are there blockers?
> >   -> No!
> >     -> Party!
> >       -> make Alpha/Beta/Release candidate compose
> >        -> test, etc.
> >   -> Yes!
> >     -> Bummer.
> >       -> make a test compose
> >        -> test, fix, etc.
> >          -> goto 2)
> > 
> > A test compose only exists when we know we still have blockers to solve.
> > Otherwise it's an alpha/beta/release candidate. Therefore, we shouldn't be 
> > adjusting the freeze schedule to add time for a 'test compose'.
> > 
> > We can certainly have additional test composes outside of the freeze for QE
> > to look at, but I don't know that they're events that affect the schedule
> > duration as much as they are simply point events in the schedule. 
> 
> With exception to the final release, releng provided "Test Composes" to
> QE before the scheduled freeze point.  This was to allow QE to run
> through the matrix with isos and see what might still be broken, so that
> we could fix it /before/ we froze.  It was an attempt to remedy the
> situation where we freeze, then discover all the bugs, and subsequently
> slip whatever release we froze for.  This is what I want to see codified
> on the schedule, the test compose before the freeze.  We need to focus
> more testing and effort /before/ the freezes as our freeze times are
> really short and we inevitably slip them.
> 
> Making freezes longer isn't really a good solution, as that directly
> prevents further development and cheats the later dates, however we
> really need to look at this schedule in the viewpoint of no frozen
> rawhide.

I agree.  I don't think I fully understand the unfrozen rawhide proposal
at first.  And I'm not sure if it solves all of our problems, but I do
think it's worth exploring as it seems to address this "tension" around
blocking code progress, as well as standardizes on a method for
reporting test feedback (which helps QA).

What do you need in order to make progress towards
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/No_Frozen_Rawhide_Proposal?  Apologies if
this is moving and I just don't have visibility into its status.

Thanks,
James

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/rel-eng/attachments/20091113/f633db79/attachment.bin