Proposal: Target tracker bugs
Jesse Keating
jkeating at redhat.com
Thu Mar 25 02:37:14 UTC 2010
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 15:03 -0400, Christopher Beland wrote:
> Unless there's a good use case
> that would require two lists or a list plus flags, why not include
> both "hard" and "soft" blockers on a single monitoring list? I agree
> with Adam's leanings - after a blocker meeting determines a bug is a
> "soft" blocker, it's sufficient to indicate that in a comment on the
> bug. There's no real need for that attribute to be separately
> queryable, because for release preparation and scheduling purposes the
> whole list is gone through one by one.
>
>
We don't really have any restrictions on what kind of fixes go in, so
there really isn't such a thing as a "soft" blocker. Either it blocks
the release or it doesn't. If it doesn't, and the update can get
through bodhi in time, it'll get included. If it blocks, we won't
release until the update gets built.
--
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/test/attachments/20100324/338aa582/attachment.bin
More information about the test
mailing list