On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 10:37 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 11:54 -0400, James Laska wrote: > > > > I like the idea of having multiple flags, however am concerned that it > > is a significant documentation/training challenge. > > > > Is there benefit in rolling this out in phases? Part#1 would involve > > adding only a 'blocker' flag to allow for improved query and 3 blocker > > request states (requested, accepted, rejected). Part#2 would add the > > team specific blockers (devel, releng and qa) and an automated mechanism > > to approve/reject 'blocker' requests based on these new flags. > > In my opinion, the training would be fairly light, and doing it in > phases wouldn't necessarily help here. > Doing it in phases removes one of the biggest advantages to me, the ease > of doing this work in an asynchronous mode. My goal is to reduce the > amount of time we spend in those meetings, and to increase clarity for > maintainers and testers as to which bugs are actually blockers. A 50% > reduction in goals in order to do it in phases doesn't sit well with me > (: +1. If we're going to do it, just do it. Stretching things out only embiggens the pain. =) -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
