On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 8:46 AM Kamil Paral <kparal(a)redhat.com> wrote:
I thought about it and 7 days probably sounds OK, considering it also includes the
weekend. I think I wouldn't increase it, but consider decreasing it if people think
it's the right way to go.
7 is definitely higher than I would have proposed. I'm not opposed to
it, but I was thinking something closer to 3 days. That would make it,
in practice, "if it's not up for discussion on the last regular
blocker review meeting before Go/No-Go, then it doesn't count." The
only bug that's really made me mad in the years
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 4:39 PM Kamil Paral <kparal(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Whether this new policy is a good idea, that's a separate question. The idealist in
me cries every time we sacrifice quality. And this policy will probably result in more
bugs being waved compared to the past. However, I feel it's better to have the rules
formalized than to wave such bugs without any real grounds and feel like cheating on our
policies every time we actually need waive something. So yeah, I guess I have no
objections to this being a part of our release criteria.
I agree with all points. It's better to explicitly say "we may choose
to go ahead under some circumstances" than to do rules-lawyering to
find loopholes that allow us to say "no, we really did follow the
criteria, this isn't a blocker because $reasons".
I'm +1 to Adam's draft as-is. We can always revise it again later if
experience finds flaws for us.
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager