On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Yeah, that's a valid concern and one I'm not ignoring. I'm just > concerned that (going by F21 Alpha and Beta) the "hero testing" doesn't > result in avoiding a slip most of the time. In the case of Alpha, that > was going on for a month before we finally were able to release. That's > not fair to QA and it *certainly* doesn't make it seem like something > new contributors would want to put themselves through. If your goal is preventing slips you are doing it wrong (tm). Your proposal would as Kevin said just result into *more* slips. What we should do is to find out *why* we slip every time and address that. The handling of the Go/NoGo meeting isn't really the problem, you are fighting the symptoms instead of the disease. So you'd have to 1) find out what causes us to slip so often (*cough* anaconda *cough* [1]) and 2) talk to the related developers / involved parties to find a way to solve it in a way that is acceptable to both sides (in that example rel eng / qa / anaconda devs). 1: Ok I didn't check the data but my impression is that most blocker bugs are in that area I might be wrong though ... but the data is available to check that. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
