On 05/05/2015 08:46 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
On Tue, May 5, 2015, at 08:35 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 05, 2015 06:19:23 PM Colin Walters wrote:
>> On Tue, May 5, 2015, at 05:18 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>>> correct. at the moment it is really unknown.
>>
>> it = risk?
>> it = "traceability"?
> Both
I am trying to understand how this identifier relates to "traceability" (which
is a term Matthew mentioned).
> we would deal with the failure as it happened. if it failed to compose when
> the final RC compose completes then it owuld miss the boat for F22 and would
> be completely absent. we have an integrated process. so there is no do overs
> or makeups. If you are okay with risking missing F22 altogether then we can do
> something.
I am OK with risking missing F22 altogether rather than ship with this string.
Whoa, really? I think that requires some discussion. A number of folks
are expecting this as part of F22 and if it's a question of "do this and
risk shipping nothing" and "hold off on this change briefly" ... I think
we need to strongly consider holding off. This definitely needs to be
discussed w/the Cloud Working Group.
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier | Principal Cloud & Storage Analyst
jzb(a)redhat.com |
http://community.redhat.com/
Twitter: @jzb |
http://dissociatedpress.net/