Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
"HdG" == Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx> writes:
HdG> I fully agree this new process is a PITA. The old process worked
HdG> very well, what problems where there with the old process that
HdG> this new process is trying to fix?
The fact that bugzilla creaks, groans and ultimately dies when faced
with a blocker bug having 1500 dependencies. The previous system just
doesn't scale to all of the core review stuff.
That much I understand, but why then not only change blocker bug to
flags and leave the rest as is? Its the ASSIGNEE bouncing, ASSIGNED <->
NEEDINFO ping-pong in the current process that annoys and confuses people.
What's annoying is that people whining because something has changed.
We've tried something new because we needed to. The whole thing is a
work in progress. Deal. If we never try anything new, we'll never do
worse but we also won't ever do any better.
You should know me long enough to know that I'm not a winer, also lets
please not make this personal. I've started screaming loudly about this,
because I don't like it and have heard from many other people that they
don't like it either (Chris Stone, Ralph Corsepius, Michael Schwendt to
name a few). The new process annoys and confuses people and makes the
barrier to entry for new packages and for new maintainers higher, which
is a BAD thing.
Let me add to that that I'm very happy to see that as a result of my
(and others) "wining" the process is being refined for the better. Also
if the people making the changes want to avoid such "wining" in the
future, they should think things through and properly communicate them
before implementing them.
Regards,
Hans
--
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
