On Fri, 2010-05-21 at 01:34 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Jesse Keating wrote:
> A solution, flags!
Well, we should carefully consider the disadvantages of that change.
Which is why I posted it to the list, for discussion.
For
example, one thing we will lose with a flag-based solution is the
transitiveness of blocking a tracker bug. So we'd lose the KDE, X11, kernel
etc. trackers or at least not have their dependencies show up in the blocker
reports. Instead, they'd all have to be nominated as blockers explicitly
even if they're already on e.g. the KDE tracker. Whether this is a good
thing or a bad thing needs to be discussed, but this doesn't seem to have
come up in the discussion so far.
Kevin Kofler
There is no reason I see that you cannot still use a KDE, X11, Kernel,
et al tracker for issues important to those various subgroups. Issues
within those trackers can individually promoted to full blocker status,
whereas others may remain "would be nice to have" items. Even with the
current tree of blockers, qa/releng/devel still went over the items on
the sub-blockers and reviewed each one for "blocker or not" status.
--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca:
http://identi.ca/jkeating