On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Adam Williamson <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 12:14 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: >> My opinion, since there are few facts to go on to overcome the burden >> stated in a written process and schedule for some time, is -1 FE. If >> it was important enough to get 3.30 on actual Beta installation media, >> it needed to be done before freeze. Not depend on a freeze exception. >> That is definitely not how things are supposed to work. > > As it happens, it is how things have been working, though. We've > granted freeze exceptions for GNOME megaupdates for many of the last > several releases (I can go back and get precise numbers if you like). That's OK. Besides, there's some chance I have voted +1 FE for a GNOME megaupdate, not least of which is because: > Notably, I can't recall a single instance where they broke the world. > This is not something I can say about a lot of packages, so I think the > desktop team deserves some credit and trust for that. For sure. But that is orthogonal to freeze exception. It's like using FE as some kind of Good Job sticker. And we all know there is increased probability that blocker bugs are not found or are found later than otherwise, because of diverted attention toward testing the megaupdate. There is no way of predicting or assessing this, but logically it's true. And so this particular usage of freeze exception ends up having more in common with craps, than a well deserved Good Job sticker. -- Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
