On Thu, 2020-11-19 at 14:02 +0100, Kamil Paral wrote: > > > Do you mean the list of trackers - BetaBlocker, FinalBlocker, BetaFE, > > > FinalFE, 0Day, PreviousRelease? I found them quite easy to remember, once > > > you vote in a few tickets. > > > > It's rather harder to keep them straight if you also have to deal with > > the similar-but-not-quite-the-same Bugzilla magic texts... > > > > The only difference seems to be in FE vs FreezeException, and then in > having "AcceptedBlocker" in the Whiteboard instead of AcceptedBetaBlocker > and AcceptedFinalBlocker. Perhaps we could fix at least the latter in > Bugzilla? It is inconvenient anyway to not be able to distinguish Beta vote > from the Final one. In Bugzilla it's redundant, though, and having the milestone in the string could produce the hard-to-resolve paradox of a bug e.g. blocking BetaBlocker but marked AcceptedFinalBlocker - what is blockerbugs supposed to think of that? That one we might just have to leave, I think. Note technically there's nothing to fix in Bugzilla: these strings have no special meaning to Bugzilla itself at all. The things that make them magic are: 1) The wiki policy pages 2) blockerbugs 3) Saved Bugzilla searches > > FWIW, I chose the long version for Bugzilla because it gives someone > > who does not already know what an "FE" is a fighting chance of > > understanding what it means. > > > > Yes, and it was the right choice. But in there we only type that once, and > in the voting ticket, we type that N times, where N is the number of > participants. And those participants quite likely know what's going on. > Similarly in IRC meetings, I don't remember anyone spelling out > "BetaFreezeException" in the long form when voting. So that's why I opted > for "FE". > > Do you think it would be better to change BetaFE/FinalFE into > BetaFreezeException/FinalFreezeException instead, to keep consistency? > > Or (and this might be actually a good idea! ;) ), should we start showing > the long form in the ticket description in the voting summary (i.e. people > not familiar with our process will still have a chance to understand the > voting summary), and allow people to submit their votes in both forms? Yes. Same as the point below. There's no reason to be overly prescriptive when accepting votes, if a string clearly and unmistakably identifies a specific vote, we should take it. -- 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 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
