Re: 'No More Alphas': wiki revision drafts

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

 



On Thu, 2017-08-03 at 21:18 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 05:16:28PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > quite meet what we aspire to. I do *NOT* propose to have any kind of
> > blocker tracking bug for the Basic release criteria; it doesn't seem to
> > fit in the process, there is no Alpha release to block, and we can't
> > realistically block nightly composes on manual test results. So a
> > tracker bug wouldn't really have any reason to exist. In the case where
> > a violation of the Basic criteria makes it into composes despite the
> > automated testing, it should be marked as a Beta blocker.
> 
> Will the blockerbugs app start showing F28 blockers at the F27 branch
> point? Or sometime later? From my point of view, the sooner the better.

It tends to go wrong in various ways when you have multiple releases
'active' at once, so we've stopped doing that lately, I'm afraid. You
can quite easily deploy a local instance, though, and configure it to
show the F28 blocker trackers; the bugs themselves are created two
releases in advance, so the F28 blocker tracker bugs already exist.
-- 
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




[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