On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 23:17:21 -0700, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > It'd be great if we can work with the anaconda team closely to try and > get involved all along the line in the UI rewrite stuff, and see if that > can reduce the pressure around release times - let's put that on the > table for the next meeting. But it might still turn out to be a tough > one. If anyone has any suggestions or ideas at all, please do contribute > them! The more thinking the better. Yeah, I think early testing will be good there. (Unfortunately, that's not an area I am good at helping with as I mostly do yum upgrades and run rawhide/branched continuously rather than do lots of test installs.) It might be useful to run through the test matrices at some other points in the release cycle to get a heads up on potential blockers with more time on them. It seemed this release we were in crisis mode for a lot of the blockers. > Yeah, agreed. I don't think there's any especial need for the go/no-go > to be an entire day ahead of the release readiness meeting, in all > honesty - it seems to work fine simply to do it earlier the same day. So > do you think it'd be alright to suggest that as a change for the F17 and > beyond scheduling? Every time we've decided the delay the go/no-go > decision, that choice in itself hasn't caused any problems, as far as > I'm aware. It simply gives us more time for validation, which is never a > bad thing... I am concerned with the process as executed not matching the documentation. I'd just like to see a change codified that either allows moving the Go / No-Go meeting when appropriate or just schedule it closer to the readiness meeting. -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
