On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 16:26 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > Probably would should just use the existing freeze exception process > for this purpose? What's the benefit of adding another thing? One thing about the freeze exception process is that we only actually review proposed freeze exceptions when it makes sense to - i.e. when we're actually in (or about to enter) a freeze. So there can be quite long periods when proposed freeze exceptions aren't being reviewed. There can also be bugs that are freeze exceptions but aren't actually terribly important, funny as it may sound. For instance, we typically grant freeze exceptions for fixing dependency errors, even if the package with the error is something incredibly obscure that only two people care about, just on the basis that it's nice to have as few consistency issues in the 'frozen' release trees as possible. But if it's a pretty obscure package, that's not really a terribly *important* bug, it's just a cleanliness thing. Another example along those lines...any non-blocking image being larger than it's supposed to be is an automatic FE. But again, is it really that *important* if the Astronomy spin is 10MiB too big? No disrespect to our astronomer friends :) The reverse case is also possible: there can be bugs that are quite important but which it makes no sense to grant a freeze exception to, because getting the fix into the frozen package set for a given milestone isn't actually necessary to solve the problem. So...the freeze exception bug list is actually not as good a proxy for 'non-blocker bugs we really care a lot about' as you might think. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
