On Sat, 2021-12-18 at 13:23 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 09:09:17AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> However, I think there'd be a solid case for FESCo to take anything
> like this as a blocker, and procedurally that makes more sense too -
> Changes are under FESCo's remit. So if a case like this is caught
> before release, I'd say file a FESCo ticket asking them to consider it
> as a blocker.
This makes sense to me. It might also make sense for big changes to also
include proposed updates to the validation criteria, just as modern software
development expects new features to come with tests for those features.
We do this, but only for *functional* requirements, which I think is
correct. I don't want us to be pinning software versions and what
specific implementation of a given function "must be" used in the
release criteria, in general, because it seems like a terrible
mechanism for it, and one that really wouldn't scale.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net