Blockers via flags?

[Jesse Keating]

On Tue, 2010-05-11 at 19:14 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 05/11/2010 07:01 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-05-11 at 10:57 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> >> Does that have anything to do with me adding 2 bugs to the blockers the
> >> day before the go/no-go meeting?
> >
> > Nope, not at all.  It's very important that everybody still be able to
> > propose blockers as easily as possible.  Checking a flag is a bit easier
> > than trying to remember which bug to block and how.
> Remembering a release blocker symbol name is more difficult than 
> remembering some cryptic fc_blocker flag's meaning?
> I don't agree with this.
> 
> What you'd loose with using flags is the "distro version" context.

Erm, the bug would be filed against a particular version.  EG the bug
has to be filed against Fedora 14 in order to be able to use flags to
mark it as a blocker for Fedora 14.  Bugs filed against rawhide wouldn't
necessarily be able to set flags (although that's an interesting
discussion to have)

The release blocker symbol name changes every release, whereas the flag
could have a static name, which would make it easier to document and
remember, in my opinion.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
-------------- 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/devel/attachments/20100511/d51576d3/attachment.bin