shrek-m@xxxxxx wrote:
John Poelstra schrieb:
---- snip ----
5) Bugs previously opened against test releases will also be merged into
the released version. For example:
\
FC6Test1 \
FC6Test2 | ===> 6
FC6Test3 /
FC6 /
think about what kind of bugs and what amount you will find under the
final/stable release version which was rawhide and not the final release.
sorry but
fc6test1 (+ devel updates)
fc6test2 (+ devel updates)
fc6test3 (+ devel updates)
== rawhide and not 6
I agree there isn't 100% correct. However, that is 2 releases ago...
those bugs are more likely to be associated with FC6 then with today's
rawhide. I believe calling them 6 makes more sense. It also makes them
easier to track down as likely candidates for flipping to
"NEEDINFO--please test against current release" and auto-closing if
there is no response [1].
f9alpha (+ devel updates)
f9beta (+ devel updates)
f9preview (+ devel updates)
== rawhide and not 9
Agreed
f9_the_last_releasecandidate == 9
Agreed
[1] All of the above raises the question of what kind of processes we
should have around managing and triaging open bugs. I don't believe
what is proposed above affects the future so much as cleans up the past.
Should all the open bugs that happen to have a version of "rawhide" at
the GA of Fedora 9 stay "rawhide" forever, or should they be mass-moved
to "9"?
What do people think?
John
--
fedora-test-list mailing list
fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
