On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 08:26 -0500, James Laska wrote: > On Wed, 2009-02-11 at 14:43 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > > b) We all more or less agreed that the process should make it quite > > easy > > to nominate a bug to 'block' a release, and bugzappers will probably > > do > > a lot of that, but ultimately for now it's probably right for Jesse > > (or, > > more formally, RelEng) to be the ultimate arbiter. Jesse would like us > > to err on the side of nominating things to be blockers - he's more > > worried about missing something important than the time it takes to > > weed > > out things he doesn't consider critical. > > I'm not sure expecting one team to process and escalate all reported > issues scales. I'd expect the subject matter experts involved with the > testing (devel+qa) to come up with criteria for their "Feature". When > there is a discrepancy between the two ... that list is taken to a 3rd > party for the Yay/Nay. That's more or less what I thought too, hence "bugzappers will probably do a lot of that" and not "bugzappers do all of that and no-one else can" :) -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
