Blockers via flags?
matt at mattmccutchen.net
Fri May 21 00:09:27 UTC 2010
On Fri, 2010-05-21 at 01:34 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jesse Keating wrote:
> > A solution, flags!
> Well, we should carefully consider the disadvantages of that change. For
> example, one thing we will lose with a flag-based solution is the
> transitiveness of blocking a tracker bug. So we'd lose the KDE, X11, kernel
> etc. trackers or at least not have their dependencies show up in the blocker
> reports. Instead, they'd all have to be nominated as blockers explicitly
> even if they're already on e.g. the KDE tracker.
Why do we even have separate tracking bugs for subprojects? If there
were a set of KDE release criteria and the Fedora release criteria
included "The KDE release criteria are met", the current structure would
make sense. But with a single set of release criteria, I propose that
the subproject tracking bugs should go away and all blockers should be
linked directly to the main tracking bug. It's easy enough to create
query links for maintainers that will find all the blockers in a
More information about the devel