On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 7:46 AM, Dusty Mabe <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 11/19/2015 04:47 PM, Amanda Carter wrote: >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> >>> From: "Amanda Carter" <[email protected]> >>> To: "Michael McGrath" <[email protected]> >>> Cc: "Matthew Miller" <[email protected]>, [email protected], >>> "Colin Walters" <[email protected]>, "Dusty >>> Mabe" <[email protected]>, "Adam Miller" <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 8:22:41 AM >>> Subject: Re: Potential Atomic 2 Week Release blockers >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> >>>> From: "Michael McGrath" <[email protected]> >>>> To: "Amanda Carter" <[email protected]> >>>> Cc: "Matthew Miller" <[email protected]>, [email protected], >>>> "Colin Walters" <[email protected]>, "Dusty >>>> Mabe" <[email protected]>, "Adam Miller" <[email protected]> >>>> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 5:17:40 PM >>>> Subject: Re: Potential Atomic 2 Week Release blockers >>>> >>>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Amanda Carter <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Adding the list. Both questions still open. >>>>> >>>> IMHO https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1276775 is a blocker >>> >>> OK, any thoughts on how this should be gated going forward? Do we expect >>> a >>> person to monitor this or do we need a mechanism for folks to >> >> Following up on this thread to let everyone know what we've worked out >> here. The first release for Atomic was not shipped due to this blocker. >> Going forward, Mike McGrath will be taking ownership of reviewing this >> backlog every 2 weeks to make sure someone is working blockers to resolution >> prior to our release window. Jen Krieger will be helping him to execute >> that. Adam has put a mechanism [1] in place to allow Mike to mark a release >> as bad if there are any blockers. >> >> I expect the process to look something like this... >> >> * A week before the 2 week release (next one is Dec 1), Jen schedules a >> review that Mike leads > > > Can this be a publicly announced meeting? Can be regularly scheduled so that > we can add it to a calendar [1] and promote it so that hopefully other > people will take interest? > > [1] - https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/ >
Unfortunately probably not only because instead of adding a new meeting to all of the teams involved (there are a few) we're going to re-purpose some time in the existing meetings. I'm open to ideas on making this more public, but we try to avoid scheduling additional meetings for people because of how much of a time sink they can be. -- Mike McGrath | [email protected] | (312) 660-3547 Atomic | Red Hat Chicago | http://projectatomic.io/
