On Jan 8, 2007, at 4:58 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 22:50 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 03:26:59PM -0600, Josh Boyer wrote:
3) Create the Freeze Review Team
This is a group of individuals that would monitor the tracking
bug and
ACK or NACK the requests. If ACKed, a package would be built and
pushed
into the repo at that point.
I don't think a Freeze Review Team is needed. I think the
contributors
should use their best judgement on whether they build for the frozen
target or the rolling one, the default being the rolling one, of
course.
Using a blocker bug to document why there was a version/package
released
for the frozen target and leave a possibility to other
contributors to
yell would be the recommended way, however. People interested in
releases
could then be in CC of that blocker.
I'd rather do it the other way. There is going to be QA on-going
of the
test releases and I want the test team (speak up Will) to _know_
what's
being pushed in.
Yeah, I'm not sure I like the idea of a "freeze" without something
keeping people from violating it. As Jesse pointed out, it's really
hard to keep freezes frozen. It makes testing awful when we don't
even get notified of proposed changes.
How much churn do we actually expect after the freezes? Couldn't we
handle it with the combined Release Cabal and QA Team doing ACK/NACK
on proposed changes?
Will we need to build something to keep track of proposals and acks?
I think RHEL does this with the bugzilla flag stuff, which seems to
drive everyone insane, so I'm hoping to avoid the Lovecraftian
horrors therein..
-w
--
Fedora-maintainers mailing list
Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
--
Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list
Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
