On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 1:28 AM, Adam Williamson awilliam@redhat.com wrote:
On Sat, 2013-05-04 at 15:58 -0700, Dan Mashal wrote:
If they do decide to keep the change, you could escalate it to FESCo. However, (speaking only for myself here) I would be VERY reluctant to override maintainers on their packages on something that is a design decision/judgement call. Where would we draw the line?
I would rather have QA have move oversight on these things. As I only discovered this while doing QA.
Excuse my cynicism here but this would also require some change to the QA process itself and what are blockers and what are not and the "nice to have" process which should be renamed "we won't hold our breath".
I don't really see any special place for QA in reviewing design decisions. I've said it before, but my opinion is that the job of QA is to determine whether things are working as intended, not to decide what the intentions should be.
No but if QA had adopted the "keyboard layouts must work" criterion that I have proposed multiple times the anaconda maintainers would have to spent their time on fixing the real issue rather than papering over it in such obscure ways.