On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 11:22 -0500, Scott Poore wrote: > I know this is late but, does this bug qualify as a blocker? > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197290 > > This is the relevant criteria for Alpha: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_22_Alpha_Release_Criteria#Remote_authentication > > > Since "Non-interactive only" was an exception, I didn't know if > there were any other unwritten exceptions possible. Thanks for catching that! We generally try to write down all the exceptions. :) It certainly seems like a reasonable candidate to me; I've thrown a proposal at it so we'll review it in the upcoming blocker review meeting. Proposing a bug as a blocker is fairly cheap action - don't just throw proposals around like candy at every trivial bug you hit as it wastes people's time reviewing them, but any time you genuinely think a bug might be a blocker, it's completely okay to propose it, that's what the review process is for! So in future you don't need to ask for on-list opinions, if it looks like it might be a blocker, just go ahead and propose it. You can do that by just marking it as blocking the bug 'AlphaBlocker', 'BetaBlocker' or 'FinalBlocker' (as appropriate) and including a comment to explain why (ideally with a link to a criterion, as you did here), or by using the blocker proposal webapp: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/propose_bug thanks! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
