Fedora 14 Blocker Bugs + Review Meeting 2010-10-08 @ 16:00 UTC (12 PM EST)
 

On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 18:05 -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 17:53 -0400, John Poelstra wrote:
> > --If you are the OWNER of one of these bugs, PLEASE add a comment to the
> > bug letting us know how things are going and what you are planning to do
> > next. I
>
> > 639730 :: MODIFIED :: empathy :: bdpepple@gmail.com :: Empathy fails to
> > connect to Google Talk :: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=639730
>
> This bug shouldn't have been marked as a blocker since it's doesn't meet
> the criteria for being a blocker. I've gone ahead and removed the
> blocker.

This isn't generally how we do things. We encourage people to mark bugs
as blockers; this constitutes *nominating* the bug as a blocker, it
makes it pop up for review at a blocker review meeting. We then usually
determine whether or not the bug meets the criteria during the review
meeting, collaboratively between...well, theoretically between qa,
releng and devel, practically between whoever shows up for the review
meeting. :) We would then give it the whiteboard field AcceptedBlocker
if we accepted it, or remove the Blocks: field and add the whiteboard
field RejectedBlocker if we rejected it.

It's not a big deal in this case as I'm pretty sure we'd vote against it
being a blocker at the meeting, but just mentioning the procedure.
Unfortunately the whole process isn't currently documented on the wiki,
but I have a draft SOP documenting it under review at present:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process_nth_draft

of course, it really helps if devs who have bugs nominated (or accepted)
as blockers can come to the blocker review meetings and help with the
discussion of those bugs. (The blocker reviews take place Fridays in
#fedora-bugzappers ).

so generally it probably works best if you just add a comment in the bug
saying you'd vote against it being a blocker, and if you have the time,
come along to the review meeting and join in the discussion there. For
this bug it's no biggie though, I think we're fine with it not being a
blocker.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Fedora 14 Blocker Bugs + Review Meeting 2010-10-08 @ 16:00 UTC (12 PM EST)
 

On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 15:25 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 18:05 -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 17:53 -0400, John Poelstra wrote:
> > > --If you are the OWNER of one of these bugs, PLEASE add a comment to the
> > > bug letting us know how things are going and what you are planning to do
> > > next. I
> >
> > > 639730 :: MODIFIED :: empathy :: bdpepple@gmail.com :: Empathy fails to
> > > connect to Google Talk :: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=639730
> >
> > This bug shouldn't have been marked as a blocker since it's doesn't meet
> > the criteria for being a blocker. I've gone ahead and removed the
> > blocker.
>
> This isn't generally how we do things. We encourage people to mark bugs
> as blockers; this constitutes *nominating* the bug as a blocker, it
> makes it pop up for review at a blocker review meeting. We then usually
> determine whether or not the bug meets the criteria during the review
> meeting, collaboratively between...well, theoretically between qa,
> releng and devel, practically between whoever shows up for the review
> meeting. :) We would then give it the whiteboard field AcceptedBlocker
> if we accepted it, or remove the Blocks: field and add the whiteboard
> field RejectedBlocker if we rejected it.

My bad, wasn't aware how that was handled. Thanks for the heads-up.

Later,
/B
--
Brian Pepple <bpepple@fedoraproject.org>

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Bpepple
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E
BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Fedora 14 Blocker Bugs + Review Meeting 2010-10-08 @ 16:00 UTC (12 PM EST)
 

On 6 October 2010 23:25, Adam Williamson <awilliam@redhat.com> wrote:

> This isn't generally how we do things. We encourage people to mark bugs
> as blockers; this constitutes *nominating* the bug as a blocker, it
> makes it pop up for review at a blocker review meeting. We then usually
> determine whether or not the bug meets the criteria during the review
> meeting, collaboratively between...well, theoretically between qa,
> releng and devel, practically between whoever shows up for the review
> meeting. :) We would then give it the whiteboard field AcceptedBlocker
> if we accepted it, or remove the Blocks: field and add the whiteboard
> field RejectedBlocker if we rejected it.

There is an outstanding bug with respect to the host name set in
Anaconda that is not kept when using the Live CD. It has been fixed in
Rawhide, the question is if it should also be fixed in F14.

Its overall impact is low. Many people leave the host name as
localhost - no impact. Others might have let's say a small home
network with two or three PCs - it is straightforward to manually
change the host name after installation. I am unsure however if this
would impact sysadmins that have for example 10 or more PCs or servers
on a network. Do they use Anaconda or Live CDs at all? Perhaps
sysadmins would like to take a look at this:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=638634
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel