On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Paul W. Frields <stickster@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kamil also mentioned having Workstation folks available when blocker
> meetings are going on, to allow for better decisions about truly
> blocking bugs.  While it may not be a good use of time for a lot of
> people to attend the entirety of a blocker bug meeting, it *would* be
> a good idea for us to be aware of the blocker meeting schedule, and to
> stay tuned in #fedora-workstation and/or the meeting channel in case
> of summoning.

I'd recommend having one or two people on "blocker bug pager duty" on
IRC, and then have the QA people ping them when discussion on
Workstation related bugs begins.  The blocker bug meeting is
ridiculously long and there is no way to ever know exactly when
discussion of a certain bug will start.  Some simple contact points
known before the meeting should make it more tolerable for everyone.

Sorry to reply with such a delay. We would really like to see more people present on the meeting, not just waiting for a ping in case we need something. The current reality is that we get almost no representation from any other team than QA (with the occasional exception of Stephen Gallagher from Server WG). Yet this is supposed to be "a collaborative effort between Release Engineering, Quality Assurance, Development, and Project Management" [1].

In the old times, the release criteria were generic and applied to all compose artifacts. With the introduction of "flavors", that is no longer true. We now have specific criteria for Server [2] [3] [4], Cloud [5] and Workstation [6] (maybe I missed some). I might be wrong, but I seem to remember that part of that flavor deal was that flavor owners would be responsible for defining flavor quality (which should include deciding when the quality is not met), and testing those flavors. This is not QA trying to offload all the work to someone else. We will be always present on those meetings. But we need your representation, you voice, when deciding whether certain bugs in your flavor should or should not block the whole release. And your technical expertise regarding those particular components, of course, that as well.

The blocker review meetings *are* ridiculously long (it's not because we enjoy it), and it makes no sense for Workstation WG people to be present for all of it. But we can definitely make adjustments. If we know we get some representative from your team, we can e.g. start with all Workstation-related bugs first. Or we can say "Workstation bugs will be discussed from 17:00 UTC". Or we can even split the meeting into several smaller ones, per working group. Or, if we know e.g. Kalev is always available during the usual blocker review timeslot, we can ping him and invite him over once the Workstation section starts. All of that works. We just need the people.

What arrangement would work best for you?

[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_27_Alpha_Release_Criteria#Server_Flavor_requirements
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_27_Beta_Release_Criteria#Domain_client_requirements
[4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_27_Beta_Release_Criteria#Server_Product_requirements
[5] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_27_Beta_Release_Criteria#Cloud_Product_requirements
[6] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_27_Final_Release_Criteria#Default_application_functionality