* Bugs which entirely prevent the composition of one or more of the
images required to be built for a currently-pending (pre-)release
* Incorrect checksums present on any of the required TC/RC images
(failures of [[QA:Testcase_Mediakit_ISO_Checksums]])
* Unresolved dependencies on the DVD
On 16/02/13 05:25 PM, Andre Robatino wrote:
Beta criterion:
The network installation image, DVD image, and live images for
release-blocking
desktops must meet current size requirements
Indeed, we should add that one - good catch.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw |
So I'm proposing we invent something called 'automatic blockers': a
list of bug types that can be declared AcceptedBlocker by any single
person in QA, releng or devel. That decision could of course be
challenged and changed if needed.
This seems completely reasonable.
--
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 18:34:33 -0800
Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
...snip...
Any thoughts on the general idea, or on the specific list of bug
types I came up with - any more to add to the list, or remove from
it? I don't want to make the list _too_ big, and it shouldn't include
On 16/02/13 08:49 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 18:34:33 -0800
Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
...snip...
Any thoughts on the general idea, or on the specific list of bug
types I came up with - any more to add to the list, or remove from
it? I don't want to make the
On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 3:34 AM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
Hey, folks. So here's another proposal from an idea that was mentioned
during the F18 cycle.
There's a few types of blocker bug that are basically no-brainers; it
doesn't make a lot of sense to waste time in blocker
Beta criterion:
The network installation image, DVD image, and live images for release-blocking
desktops must meet current size requirements
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Hey, folks. So here's another proposal from an idea that was mentioned
during the F18 cycle.
There's a few types of blocker bug that are basically no-brainers; it
doesn't make a lot of sense to waste time in blocker meetings discussing
them, and more importantly, sometimes they show up and we
On 02/16/2013 02:34 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
Hey, folks. So here's another proposal from an idea that was mentioned
during the F18 cycle.
There's a few types of blocker bug that are basically no-brainers; it
doesn't make a lot of sense to waste time in blocker meetings
discussing them, and
Adam Williamson wrote:
So I'm proposing we invent something called 'automatic blockers': a list
of bug types that can be declared AcceptedBlocker by any single person
in QA, releng or devel. That decision could of course be challenged and
changed if needed.
Excellent idea, certainly worth
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 18:34:33 -0800
From: awill...@redhat.com
To: test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Proposal: automatic blockers
Hey, folks. So here's another proposal from an idea that was mentioned
during the F18 cycle.
There's a few types of blocker bug that are basically
On 15/02/13 07:49 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
The problem being that what is an automatic blocker to me is not an
automatic blocker to you.
Case in point from last release cycle the regression I faced with radeon
driver
That's not really a problem at all: the only things that are
12 matches
Mail list logo
