On Mar 24, 2010, at 10:46, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 08:37 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > >> My worry is the size of the target trackers, and our ability to >> appropriately manage them. We're already running into this with the >> Alpha/Beta blocker list, maintainers don't know for sure if the bug >> has >> been "accepted" as a blocker or not. Since anybody can make the bug >> blocking relationship, there is that period of uncertainty and doubt. >> >> As much as I'd hate to move to using flags of some kind, I really do >> think there is room to distinguish between a /proposed/ blocker or >> target bug and an /accepted/ blocker or target bug. Either a flag >> that >> goes from ? to + or a keyword added by one of us during our blocker >> review meetings, it should be really lightweight, no where close to >> the >> 3 ack system RHT uses for RHEL stuff. >> >> ... discuss? > > In the interest of simplicity and not having to revise a bunch of > pages :), how about we just add a comment to any bug that's accepted > as > a blocker during a review meeting? > > We already add a comment to any bug that's *rejected* as a blocker to > explain why we're rejecting it, so this would match that quite nicely. > -- > That works somewhat but is not queryable. -- Jes -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
