realm crash during kickstart bug blocker?

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 11:22 -0500, Scott Poore wrote:
> I know this is late but, does this bug qualify as a blocker?
> 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197290
> 
> This is the relevant criteria for Alpha:
> 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_22_Alpha_Release_Criteria#Remote_authentication
> 
> 
> Since "Non-interactive only" was an exception, I didn't know if 
> there were any other unwritten exceptions possible.

Thanks for catching that! We generally try to write down all the 
exceptions. :) It certainly seems like a reasonable candidate to me; 
I've thrown a proposal at it so we'll review it in the upcoming 
blocker review meeting.

Proposing a bug as a blocker is fairly cheap action - don't just throw 
proposals around like candy at every trivial bug you hit as it wastes 
people's time reviewing them, but any time you genuinely think a bug 
might be a blocker, it's completely okay to propose it, that's what 
the review process is for!

So in future you don't need to ask for on-list opinions, if it looks 
like it might be a blocker, just go ahead and propose it. You can do 
that by just marking it as blocking the bug 'AlphaBlocker', 
'BetaBlocker' or 'FinalBlocker' (as appropriate) and including a 
comment to explain why (ideally with a link to a criterion, as you did 
here), or by using the blocker proposal webapp:

https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/propose_bug

thanks!
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net