Blocker Bug Voting and Conversation

[Kamil Paral]

> > If we are not in a rush, I'd keep everything in the meeting. If we
> > are in a rush (like now), I'd move some "obvious" (or
> > controversial, those might be good candidates too) items outside
> > of the meeting, but not into the bugzilla. An email thread on the
> > test list is much better. It can contain long discussion without
> > obfuscating bugzilla. Bugzilla can contain just a single comment
> > with a hyperlink to the discussion, so that anyone interested can
> > join. Once consensus is reached on the list, one of QA guys can
> > update bugzilla status.
> 
> Same here as well
> 
> > There is one important drawback, and that is the necessity to be
> > subscribed to the list.
> 
> I don't call that a draw back but rather the minimum requirement of
> being part of the QA community ( the other being fas/bugzilla account
> )

Yes, but don't forget the blocker bug process is a joint effort of developers, QA, release engineers and anyone else who is interested. It certainly presents some barrier. Some people might rather refrain from commenting because they would have to subscribe to yet another mailing list. I view it as very unfortunate (I am personally not fond of mailing lists at all), but I still see it as a better alternative to bugzilla voting and I don't see anything superior available.