On Thu, 2013-02-28 at 16:51 -0700, Tim Flink wrote: > > To solve this, we have a couple of options: > > > > 1. Start using the defaultcc plugin for trac such that emails for the > > blocker tracking app are directed to a new qa-devel@ list > > > > 2. Move all development related tickets out of the Fedora QA trac into > > a new trac instance for the blocker tracking app which uses qa-devel@ > > for notifications. > > > > 3. Move all development related tickets to a different existing trac > > (probably autoqa) > There hasn't been much of a response to this yet, so I'm assuming that > everyone is OK with the idea of (1) and keeping the blocker tracking > app bugs on the fedora-qa trac. If we're going to migrate to a new > trac instance, I'd rather do it soon (in the next week) since we're > getting close to the F19 branch date. > > On a related note, the proposal to consolidate autoqa-devel@ and other > QA development discussion on to a single list went over well and we've > started migrating over to the new qa-devel@ list [1] Sorry for the late response. Personally I am fine with 1) or 2). I thought the meeting discussion tended in favour of #2, and viking seemed to prefer that option, on the basis of a separation between development and non-development tasks. Either option is manageable, though if we go with 1), I think we might want to set up some custom filters in trac to make common searches and separations between the two 'types' of ticket available; trac's default filters kind of suck, for our purposes, I think. -- 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
