On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:24:16PM +0200, Kamil Paral wrote: > > Another consideration that might be relevant: is this a *new* issue or > > something that also affects the current release (either as released or > > with updates)? If something is a clear-cut blocker criterion violation > > but isn't a regression *and* we're running late, using further release > > delay as a forcing function feels like cutting off our nose to spite > > our face. > I'm not in favor of this one. Too many important bugs have been waived in > the past (even those easily fixable) just because "it's not a new bug". I > don't see why it should matter. Sure, we can use the existing data to > better estimate the impact (how often people complain about this, bug > duplicates, etc). But that's just better input data. It should not affect > the decision process. Or is the thinking process something like "users are > already used to suffer from this bug, and perhaps can even work around it, > so we don't need to try that hard to fix it"? I don't agree to that. We should definitely fix these things. I just think that delaying the release is a very big hammer -- in a case where maybe a hammer isn't even called for. Delaying the release means that users are denied all sorts of other improvements, and developers can't get their stuff in the hands of users. The release delay itself doesn't _help_ the fix in any way. We're just using it as a forcing function, and I think that causes more problems than it actually solves. -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ test mailing list -- test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to test-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
