Re: PROPOSAL: Blocking the release is our only "big hammer" — let's add a softer one.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

I drafted a process to cover the evaluation of "Important bugs" [1].
It still needs some work on the wording, however it should be good
enough for review and comments. May I ask for a feedback and possibly
improvement proposals, please ?

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Program_Management/Important_bugs_and_issues_process

Thanks a lot,
Jan

On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 3:29 AM, Adam Williamson
<adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-10-14 at 11:26 +1000, Jeff Fearn wrote:
>>
>> Not that I think either of those fields are good for marking something
>> as a blocker for the distribution, a blocker flag would be more useful
>> for that IMO.
>
> None of this is about the blocker process, we already have one of those
> and it works fine (it doesn't use flags, though that would work just as
> well as what we have).
> --
> 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



-- 
Jan Kuřík
Platform & Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux