On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 21:11:22 -0800 Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 21/02/13 01:11 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> We discussed a few possible changes to the blocker bug meeting > >> process > >> at the QA meeting this week. It was agreed that I'd draft up these > >> changes for list discussion. So here they are! Sent to test@ and > >> devel@ > >> as QA, devel and releng are the stakeholders in this process: I'm > >> figuring releng folks are all subscribed to one list or the other. > >> > >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_QA_SOP_blocker_bug_meeting > >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_QA_SOP_blocker_bug_process > >> > > As it did these moves during F18 cycle, it makes sense. Also I hope > > F19 won't be such beast as F18 (yeah, hope :D). With automatic > > blocker status for specific bug types, I think we are going the > > good direction! Thanks guys! > > Thanks for the feedback, Jaro and others. As per the discussion at > the meeting on Monday, I've gone ahead and put these changes into > production. So everyone remember to use #fedora-blocker-review for > the next blocker meeting :) Does this mean we can/should retire the #fedora-bugzappers channel now? Shall I do that? kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
