On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Adam Williamson <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2015-06-24 at 14:49 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Chris Murphy < >> lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Yet this bug [1] is routinely voted >> >> [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864198 Not that >> anyone should go try to make sense out of a three year old bug with >> over 100 comments... but the gist is "nah, we don't want to fix it >> now, therefore the release criteria don't matter". > > That is not an accurate summary. For F20 it was rejected as a Beta > blocker and accepted as a Final blocker. It was addressed by preventing > the installer from allowing /boot to be on a btrfs subvolume. Preventing the conditions that result in boot failure is not the same thing as fixing the underlying problem with /boot on Btrfs being unsupported by grubby. Such a work around would never be considered acceptable for ext3, ext4 or XFS /boot volumes. We'd block on that. And since something like Fedora 18/19 we supposedly agreed Btrfs should have parity with other fs's with respect to release criteria, but plainly that's not the case. What really irritates me about this bug more than any in recent memory is we had a contributor working to patch grubby to fix this problem. The patches were tested by you and by me and they worked. Yet for f'n 9 months pjones didn't have the courtesy to bring his (eventual) criticisms to gczarcinski. Not until at least half a dozen people had to go through this goddamn bug, yet again, for Fedora 22 blocker review, make it a blocker, do we get an offline relay from pjones that the patches were deficient and he wanted to do it differently but with no further elaboration on what that should look like in case someone wants to do that work. And now gczarcinsk doesn't respond to any emails to any of his email addresses: so he's either died in the long interim it took to lead him on only to tell him to go pound salt months later, or he's sufficiently pissed off with the Fedora process that he's over it. So you're right, the summary was not completely accurate. -- Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
