Proposal: "automatic blockers"

[Adam Williamson]

On 20/02/13 06:23 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-02-15 at 18:34 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> Hey, folks. So here's another proposal from an idea that was mentioned
>> during the F18 cycle.
>>
>> There's a few types of blocker bug that are basically no-brainers; it
>> doesn't make a lot of sense to waste time in blocker meetings discussing
>> them, and more importantly, sometimes they show up and we want to
>> quickly accept them as blockers and get the fixes in, but we have to try
>> and track down three people to vote +1 before they can be accepted.
>>
>> So I'm proposing we invent something called 'automatic blockers': a list
>> of bug types that can be declared AcceptedBlocker by any single person
>> in QA, releng or devel. That decision could of course be challenged and
>> changed if needed.
>
> The initial feedback on this was broadly positive, but viking's first
> response indicated it wasn't clear enough about how strict the
> requirements are, and Andre suggested an additional type. Andre also
> made the sensible suggestion that we could add a corresponding
> 'automatic freezeexception' procedure.

As discussed and agreed at the QA meeting yesterday, I've gone ahead and 
put the second draft of this change into 'production':

https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=QA%3ASOP_blocker_bug_process&diff=324657&oldid=323618
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=QA%3ASOP_freeze_exception_bug_process&diff=324660&oldid=320231

Thanks for the feedback folks!
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net