On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 10:15 -0500, Przemek Klosowski wrote: > > Having said that, I could see there might be a case for delaying the > freeze before it starts, if the overall schedule is delayed for > well-understood reasons.
This cycle was actually kind of an interesting case, because on the one hand, there's a pretty good argument that we were in a very bad state at freeze time this cycle. On the *other* hand, one of the main reasons we were in a bad state is because people kept frickin' landing de- stabilizing changes while we were still dealing with the fallout from the previous de-stabilizing change: we've had GCC 8, various unannounced soname bumps, basically all of nu-Modularity showing up in the middle there somewhere, anaconda modularization, new versions of pungi and pykickstart and systemd, and that's just the things I *remember*. It's been something of a wild ride. Freezing at least stops any *more* wacky new crap landing while we're still trying to sort out the remains of this last batch. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
