Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Dude, the freeze policy is pretty understandable.
Did you see a formal code freeze announcement? I haven't.
The Fedora Core test3 include a freeze announcement. Refer to the
following links
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-announce-list/2006-February/msg00059.html
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Core/ReleaseFreezeProcess
That said, I do understand that freezes cause frustration. If you
look on the linux-kernel mailing list, you'll see the ongoing tension
between release management and getting patches in.
I am familiar with code freezes and don't argue on their necessity.
But if a bug prevents function after a code freeze, it qualifies as
"release critical"/"must fix" and showstopper.
The spec cleanup that has been proposed doesnt count as a release
critical or must fix bug since it doesnt prevent any critical functionality.
However, this shouldn't prevent maintainers from providing proper fixes,
and doesn't justify adding semi-cooked, semi-sought-out emergency hacks
into packages.
Since the cleanup isnt critical, every change has a potential chance for
regression and taking into account that there are critical issues that
needs to be fixed in the same time, prioritizing the actual development
time to fix blockers over the smaller changes is important and thats the
process being followed here.
--
Rahul
--
fedora-test-list mailing list
fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list