On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 1:10 PM Adam Williamson <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Let's be clear about what we mean by 'waiving'. Actually I'd like to > avoid using that word at all (yes I know I did it once, I edited my > mail to take them out but missed one). > > We are *not* 'waiving' the criterion. We are *not* deciding the bug > isn't a blocker. We are deciding to mark it as blocking the next > milestone instead of the current one. OK yeah so it's a delayed blocker. That underscores the ISO maximum size is probably a soft requirement for beta. > > Essentially, no one found it intuitively compelling or desirable to > > actually block release, even though it's unquestionably a blocker. > > Since the bug is not blocking the release tells us it is in fact not a > > release blocking bug. It's a blocker in name only, in practice it's > > not. It's a contradiction, and thus hilarious. > > But this would be the case for any bug we apply the 'last minute' > policy to. There is nothing specific to automatic blockers in anything > you write, yet we agreed the policy anyway, and AFAIR you +1ed it. Yes, but that's only half of the hilarity. I also -1'd blocking on ISO size. I'm just noting the contrast between highly objective nature of automatic blockers, and the subjectivity injected by the last minute policy. I really hadn't considered that particular combination. -- Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ test mailing list -- test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to test-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
