Review and notification of blocker bugs
awilliam at redhat.com
Thu Jul 28 22:47:53 UTC 2011
On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 16:20 -0600, Tim Flink wrote:
> > 3. If 'no' to question 2, do people think we need to do some sort of
> > review and notification outside of the blocker meetings and updating
> > the bugs themselves? If so, what?
> I think that there could be some value in going over the blocker list
> between meetings but I'm not as sure about formalizing a time for it. I
> certainly don't think that there would be a benefit to pestering
> reporters and devs about bugs on a daily basis - that would be
Yup, that's similar to my feelings. My first gut instinct on this was to
add a paragraph to the blocker bug SOP advising that QA group members
review the blocker bug list daily during the later part of release
phases, but not have any 'extra' email threads.
> The possible benefit I can see would be the potential to catch big
> issues a couple of days earlier than we otherwise would. I wonder how
> many major issues went undetected in F15 until a blocker review
Really, not many, I don't think. Several of us, at least including James
and myself, make a point of being CCed on the blocker bugs and looking
at any bug marked as blocking one as soon as we get the email
notification. If you don't do this at present, it's certainly a good
idea to start :)
> It seems to me that we could achieve the same effect by going
> over them bit by bit between the blocker review meetings.
> Any implementation for this seems similar to the proposal to reduce
> blocker bug review meeting length  maybe they could end up being
> combined if successful.
Yep, it's certainly the same kind of ground.
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
More information about the test