On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Adam Williamson <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 13:48 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > >> From my limited perspective, such non-functional failure held up >> release when it violated a release criterion in effect because that >> non-functionality became coupled with image blocking, i.e. if kernel >> doesn't function, then image doesn't function/is DOA, DOA images are a >> release criteria violation, therefore block. Correct? Or is there some >> terminology nuance here that I'm still missing in the sequence? > > No, even in this case there is no release blocking impact, because > nothing release blocking is broken by the bug. The i686 images are not > release blocking, end of story. Even if they are completely DOA, that > does not block release. Yes, I meant i686 in the past tense. OK so I think I get it. i686 is officially primary, but in practice it's at best secondary. And that should be made official. TBD whether there's even enough people power and momentum to support it as secondary. >> It's best to assume I don't understand the terms well enough to use >> them precisely, rather than assume I'm trying to redefine them. > > I was not actually thinking of you there (I just picked your post to > reply to since it was at the top of the pile), more the vagueness in > the thread in general. Got it. -- Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
