I am talking about the quorum, if there is a late discovered bug, that would normally be considered a blocker, but because
a) it could not be fixed on time, and
b) it is not as serious as it would prevent people from using Fedora anyway
In this case, I think more people to decide is crucial because it keeps us from letting bugs flow into releases whenever we might need to. If more people decide that it is ok, then it is ok.
What if any number of people in an IRC meeting could decide it? Then one person could possibly decide it, too? Or two? Or three? Or how many at least? And that is the quorum. Or do we say, it should be some percentage of the present? Ok.
Until now, we always used the "above 50%" which leaves a bitter after-taste if you are in the "below 50" group. Therefore, I suggest more than 50. So that it is clearly decided that we want that outcome.
That's 80% of votes, but just 16,67% of the total audience from your matrix.
I do not understand which matrix do you mean?
The ksieve bug was reported by me in early February ... a long time before Beta and Final. I did not propose it a blocker, because I thought, that they would have fixed it a long time before Beta or Final. The did not. However that is not a best example of an unexpected blocker jumping out of nowhere. It was known for a long time.
I like that things are always decided by the community and with my suggestion I cry for more community.
Lukas
_______________________________________________ test mailing list -- test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to test-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
