On Tue, Apr 11, 2017, at 02:09 PM, Adam Miller wrote: > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Colin Walters <walters@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1435310 > > raised the issue that apparently, Atomic Host isn't "release blocking". > > I think we have plenty of resources to match whatever criteria > > there are for that for Fedora 27. Thoughts? > > Does it make sense for Atomic Host to be "release blocking" when we > can just release every two weeks (or really whenever we want) where as > traditional release is bound to the standard cycle? It's loosely > coupled. The concrete thing I'm trying to achieve is that bugs like https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1435310 are able to be fixed during freeze time. It's exceedingly strange to me that we had to structure the request as affecting the "Cloud Base" image just to satisfy the process. There are other possibilities - we could carry "overrides" in just FAH. That would be useful in a variety of circumstances of course, but carries its own risks/rewards. To turn this around again - feel free to propose *alternate solutions*, but just questioning the rationale doesn't make sense to me, because that bug is an example of where (IMO) the process is broken. _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list -- cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
