On Tue, 2013-11-05 at 08:23 +0100, drago01 wrote: > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 3:03 AM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, 2013-10-27 at 01:46 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > >> Adam Williamson wrote: > >> > I don't think we'd really be correct in blocking the release for such > >> > issues - especially not Beta. We used to have 'polish' criteria for > >> > Final which at least required the icons used in the system menus - i.e. > >> > what's specified in the app's .desktop file - to be sane for all > >> > installed applications, but we dropped that (and other polish criteria) > >> > with the F19/F20 criteria re-write on the basis that they were really > >> > stretching a bit too far and would be unlikely to hold up to a 'last > >> > blocker before release' acid test. Stuff like this doesn't break > >> > anyone's use of the system catastrophically and can reasonably be fixed > >> > with updates. > >> > >> But it also affects the live images (making them look very unpolished) and > >> we don't respin those. > > > > That's why I said 'reasonably' not 'perfectly' :) I can see an argument > > for blocking Final, though in practice, I don't think our current > > standards are such that it really makes sense to claim our final > > releases are so smooth as to be worth enforcing a high standard of > > polish via the blocker mechanisms > > Then we should that. There is a difference between "perfect" and something that > looks obviously broken. Are we really fighting about the classification of fixed bugs here, or is there a new issue that I am not aware of ? -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
