Suggested Freeze Policy change for Fedora 22+

[drago01]

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> Yeah, that's a valid concern and one I'm not ignoring. I'm just
> concerned that (going by F21 Alpha and Beta) the "hero testing" doesn't
> result in avoiding a slip most of the time. In the case of Alpha, that
> was going on for a month before we finally were able to release. That's
> not fair to QA and it *certainly* doesn't make it seem like something
> new contributors would want to put themselves through.

If your goal is preventing slips you are doing it wrong (tm). Your
proposal would as Kevin said just result into *more* slips.
What we should do is to find out *why* we slip every time and address
that. The handling of the Go/NoGo meeting isn't really the problem,
you are fighting the symptoms instead of the disease.

So you'd have to 1) find out what causes us to slip so often (*cough*
anaconda *cough* [1]) and 2) talk to the related developers / involved
parties to find a way to solve it in a way that is acceptable to both
sides (in that example rel eng / qa / anaconda devs).

1: Ok I didn't check the data but my impression is that most blocker
bugs are in that area I might be wrong though ... but the data is
available to check that.