Proposal: Target tracker bugs

James Laska jlaska at redhat.com
Thu Mar 25 12:24:15 UTC 2010


On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 20:48 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 19:26 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> 
> > Historically we've used Target thusly: When issues are proposed as
> > release blocking, and "the powers that be" decide that we wouldn't in
> > fact delay the release for those issues, we often put them on Target,
> > which gives developers an easy way to see issues which are "important"
> > to work on, but not "important enough" to block the release.  But really
> > there is little interaction between the Target tracker and the "powers
> > that be" beyond the initial dropping.  Target has been more for the
> > maintainers' tracking than anybody else.  
> 
> Just to clarify, the motivation for us (Bugzappers) starting this thread
> is that it's our belief maintainers aren't really using the Target
> trackers for this purpose lately. We haven't seen anything to indicate
> those bugs are receiving any more attention than any other bugs.

Unintentional thread hijacking :)  But seriously, for my own
understanding, my responses are focused on better understanding how
Target is used to make more informed suggestions on how we might improve
it's use in light of revised release criteria and critpath packages.

My understanding of the Target and Blocker process is they are a
mechanism to draw attention to what Fedora has decided [1] are the
important issues.  In order to understand if there is a place for Target
bugs, I think we need to answer some questions:

     1. What is the scope of bugs we want to consider?  Critpath or all
        components?
     2. How restrictive do we want to be when it comes to the scope and
        milestones (Alpha, Beta and Final)?  Do we want ...
             A. fixes *only* for reviewed Blocker bugs?
             B. fixes *only* for reviewed Blocker bugs and reviewed
                'nice to have' bugs?
             C. fixes for reviewed Blocker bugs and anything else
                maintainers feel are necessary
             D. fixes for anything a maintainer feels is necessary

Have we answered these questions?  

Thanks,
James

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria
-------------- 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/20100325/075563c3/attachment.bin 


More information about the test mailing list