Hi,I think all 3 of us envision very similar things, we just have different things we think/talk about, and different understandings of Nate's suggestion. I for example understood that Nate suggests to make bugs matching the named criteria the *trigger* for making (or discussing) a new release. I think you understood it differently, i.e. the maintainers initiate this discussion.
On 9/8/22 12:25, Harald Sitter wrote: > The way I understand the maintainer would do this?I'd also imagine pretty much this to happen, yes. But as you say, what actually triggers the release discussion is "you ask the release team to spin an emergency release". To me this is the decision which matters, made by the maintainer(s), and everything else is just paperwork to back that up.
> Just to be clear, I'm not sure we need the paperwork of having a bug > and setting it vhi, but we probably do need some workflow to hold on > to.Yes, agreed. IMO requiring a bug with certain flags set isn't very helpful. I'd rather suggest to go for something like "Out-of-schedule bugfix releases are only considered to fix bugs which severely impact an application's functionality for one of its core use cases" or the like, and then one can argue about whether this definition is met.
At which point the whole thing has nothing to do with bug tickets any more, which I understood was the core point Francis was also trying to make.
Greetings, Sven
OpenPGP_0xA4AAD0019BE03F15.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
