On Tue, 2022-03-15 at 08:11 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 5:33 PM Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
> FESCo has a "make this a blocker" button... I kind of feel an itch for a
> generalized "sometimes stuff comes up" lever that goes the _other_
> direction, rather than a very specific carve-out.
Like Adam, I fear we'd be too tempted to use it as a "YOLO, ship it!"
button. It wouldn't happen right away, but slowly, we'd become more
comfortable with waiving more things. I think there are more likely to
be cases where we'd want to block on things (e.g. "wow, this bug will
be really embarrassing when reviewers find it, but it doesn't actually
violate any criteria") arbitrarily than cases where we'd wave. In the
"this should be a blocker, actually" case, we can lean on FESCo to use
their blocker power to apply it, so I don't think Council needs an
explicit authority there. We already have exceptions to allow some
blockers to be waived, and I think most of the ones we'd want to waive
could be handled under those.
Also, as a group we're pretty good at word lawyering when we set our
minds to it, so we can find ways to say "this bug does not violate a
very specific interpretation of the criteria" if it comes down to it.
:-)
And to expand on this a bit - I'd say that Council *does* have the
power already, if it comes down to it, to say "we have decided that the
release criteria should say XXX. Make it so." And I actually would
prefer Council do *that* if it comes to it, than just be able to say
"whatever the release criteria say, bug YYY is not a blocker". It seems
somehow more transparent and in line with the goal of making consistent
decisions to me.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net