Proposal: Target tracker bugs

[Adam Williamson]

On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 08:37 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:

> My worry is the size of the target trackers, and our ability to
> appropriately manage them.  We're already running into this with the
> Alpha/Beta blocker list, maintainers don't know for sure if the bug has
> been "accepted" as a blocker or not.  Since anybody can make the bug
> blocking relationship, there is that period of uncertainty and doubt.
> 
> As much as I'd hate to move to using flags of some kind, I really do
> think there is room to distinguish between a /proposed/ blocker or
> target bug and an /accepted/ blocker or target bug.  Either a flag that
> goes from ? to + or a keyword added by one of us during our blocker
> review meetings, it should be really lightweight, no where close to the
> 3 ack system RHT uses for RHEL stuff.
> 
> ... discuss?

In the interest of simplicity and not having to revise a bunch of
pages :), how about we just add a comment to any bug that's accepted as
a blocker during a review meeting?

We already add a comment to any bug that's *rejected* as a blocker to
explain why we're rejecting it, so this would match that quite nicely.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net