On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 10:59 PM Ben Cotton <bcotton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I want to address a few comments in particular:
> Kevin Fenzi:
> I'm prefer to add a new milestone of 'day before release' and put it
> there.
The current schedule starts the "create the release announcement" on
the day of the Go/No-Go meeting. I don't think that makes much sense:
the announcement can be pre-written and edited to track changes in
release dates or Changes status. I'll go ahead and move that to *end*
on the Go/No-Go day. My concern remains what happens if the
announcement isn't ready by the deadline? We either proceed like we've
done in the past and risk a rush to publish at the end, or we declare
the release No-Go, in which case there's no practical difference from
what I propose.
> Adam Williamson (out of order)
> 1. I'm fine with the overall release process blocking, in some sense,
> on things like release announcements not being done.
>
> 3. The Go/No-Go meeting is not necessarily the best place to decide on
> this, but I'm open to it being chosen.
The Go/No-Go meeting is the only real decision point we have, so IMO
it makes sense to add this in there. The Release Readiness Meeting is
more informative than decision-making (although it sounds like it may
be time to revisit that meeting more broadly, so maybe we change
this?)
> More Adam Williamson
> 2. I believe this should **NOT** be handled through the things actually
> called the "Fedora Release Criteria" and the process for nominating and
> reviewing "release blocker" bugs.
Agreed. To be clear, that is not what I am proposing. I've probably
been sloppy in my wording, but I'm thinking of this as a criterion
exclusively for the Go/No-Go process.
> Mohan Boddu
> I guess we can just consider as a soft criteria and if its not ready, we will just ask
people to help marketing team and get the article ready by Friday or Monday.
Right. If it's "close" (for some value of close) then Marketing can
say they are go and get it finished by Monday. Of course, the
counter-argument to this is that a squishy criterion that we can just
accept if we want to isn't much of a criterion.
I like this. I read this as we are "no-go" if marketing is no-go. If they are "go" and we don't like their definition of go, let's take it up with them when it happens.
regards,
bex
--
Ben Cotton
Fedora Program Manager
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
_______________________________________________
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
Brian (bex) Exelbierd | bexelbie@xxxxxxxxxx | bex@xxxxxxxxx
Fedora Community Action & Impact Coordinator
@bexelbie | http://www.winglemeyer.org
Fedora Community Action & Impact Coordinator
@bexelbie | http://www.winglemeyer.org
_______________________________________________ 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
