On Mon, 2017-07-17 at 17:48 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > Hi, folks! <snip> So there was some great feedback on the first version of this proposal; here's the second draft, with all the suggestions considered and applied. Note, given the misunderstanding between Kamil and Matt, I added a little paragraph to specifically clarify that the list of factors to consider really is just a list of things to *consider*, not a checklist of criteria that we apply unthinkingly. As I explained in the first mail, the proposal is to add a section to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process , called "Exceptional cases", as a sub-section of the 'Reviewing blocker bugs' section. Here is the revised proposal for how the new section should read: ################## === Exceptional cases === Generally speaking, any bug that is agreed to be a violation of the [[Fedora Release Criteria|release criteria]] should be accepted as a blocker bug for the next relevant milestone release. However, as explained in the [[Fedora_Release_Life_Cycle|Fedora life cycle page]] and the [[Fedora_Release_Criteria#Release_Constraints|release criteria]], we consider Fedora's release process not to be strictly based on time ''or'' strictly based on quality, but to take both into consideration. This can mean that, in some exceptional circumstances, we may agree that a bug constitutes a sufficient violation of the release criteria that it would ordinarily be accepted as a blocker bug for the next milestone release, but in fact accept it as a blocker bug for a later milestone release. There are currently two established circumstances in which this may occur. Firstly, it may occur if it is agreed to be very unlikely that the bug can be fixed within a reasonable time frame for the release to be made. Secondly, it may occur if the bug is discovered and/or proposed as a blocker very late in the release validation process. Sometimes, a relatively less important blocker bug (such as a non-vital default installed application on a release-blocking medium failing to run, for instance) may only be found very near the end of the release validation process, too late for it to be reasonably possible to fix it without delaying the release. Again, we may make the determination that in such a case it is preferable to go ahead with the release rather than delay it to fix such a late-discovered bug. All such cases must be evaluated and discussed by the usual parties (usually at a blocker bug review meeting) and all relevant factors must be taken into account, much like the discussion of a bug that is a 'conditional' violation of the release criteria. At least the following will almost always be relevant: * The severity and likely prevalence of the bug * Whether the bug could, or should, have been discovered and/or proposed as a blocker earlier * Whether the bug affects the existing stable releases (if it does, there is generally less benefit to be had by delaying the new release) * How long the release in question has already been delayed * Whether delaying the release may give us an opportunity to carry out other desirable work * The possible effects of the expected delay (to Fedora itself, and also to other things influenced by Fedora's schedules, including downstream projects) Note that these factors should be carefully and intelligently considered on a case-by-case basis. This isn't a checklist; we cannot just say "oh, that bug existed in the previous release, therefore it's not a blocker, done". It's just a list of some of the factors we typically ''consider'' in making this determination. It is expected that in almost all 'exceptional' cases, the bug will be accepted as a blocker either for the very next milestone release, or for the equivalent milestone for the next release (e.g. if this 'exceptional' provision is agreed to apply to a bug that otherwise would have blocked {{FedoraVersion|long|next}} Final, it should be accepted as a blocker either for {{FedoraVersion|long|next2}} Alpha or {{FedoraVersion|long|next2}} Final). ################# -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
