On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 16:20 -0600, Tim Flink wrote: > > 3. If 'no' to question 2, do people think we need to do some sort of > > review and notification outside of the blocker meetings and updating > > the bugs themselves? If so, what? > > I think that there could be some value in going over the blocker list > between meetings but I'm not as sure about formalizing a time for it. I > certainly don't think that there would be a benefit to pestering > reporters and devs about bugs on a daily basis - that would be > counterproductive. Yup, that's similar to my feelings. My first gut instinct on this was to add a paragraph to the blocker bug SOP advising that QA group members review the blocker bug list daily during the later part of release phases, but not have any 'extra' email threads. > The possible benefit I can see would be the potential to catch big > issues a couple of days earlier than we otherwise would. I wonder how > many major issues went undetected in F15 until a blocker review > meeting. Really, not many, I don't think. Several of us, at least including James and myself, make a point of being CCed on the blocker bugs and looking at any bug marked as blocking one as soon as we get the email notification. If you don't do this at present, it's certainly a good idea to start :) > It seems to me that we could achieve the same effect by going > over them bit by bit between the blocker review meetings. > > Any implementation for this seems similar to the proposal to reduce > blocker bug review meeting length [1] maybe they could end up being > combined if successful. Yep, it's certainly the same kind of ground. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
