Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?
- From: Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>
- To: Matthias Clasen <matthias clasen gmail com>
- Cc: Translation Team <gnome-i18n gnome org>, Desktop Hackers <desktop-devel-list gnome org>, gnome-doc-list <gnome-doc-list gnome org>, release-team <release-team gnome org>
- Subject: Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?
- Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 00:20:00 +0100
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 18:28 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net> wrote:
> > Heya,
> > After having to send in another code freeze break request e-mail, I
> > realised that the process is problematic. Apart from the release team
> > and the patch sender, nobody else knows about the freeze break request,
> > or about the status of the request.
> > I think that, at the very least for GNOME 3.4 onwards, we should switch
> > to using a keyword in bugzilla, and the release-team, docs team and i18n
> > teams can monitor newly request breaks, through RSS feeds (the design
> > team does that), and get the keywords cleared when the freeze break has
> > a result.
> > That means that there's no problems with the timeline (patches that go
> > in before the request got accepted for example), accountability and
> > traceability, as well as visibility for the bugsquad and QA teams in
> > downstream communities.
> > Opinions?
> I'm in favour of anything that makes the process more transparent and
> less annoying.
> Of course, one of the main purposes of freezes is to slow down the
> commit rate, so some annoyance will have to remain as a deterrent...
I'm guessing that we'd need to refine the criteria for requesting freeze
breaks, and that the release team would remove the keyword and put a
reason why it didn't match the criteria in those cases.
] [Thread Prev