On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Amanda Carter <acar...@redhat.com> wrote: > Adding the list. Both questions still open. >
IMHO https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1276775 is a blocker https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1278984 not a blocker if it can be fixed by the next 2 week release. I'm willing to hear arguments on this one but I don't know that contacting docker from within a docker container is a common use case (I know openshift does this for builds but I don't think many are running openshift on atomic host today). -Mike > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Colin Walters" <walt...@redhat.com> >> To: "Amanda Carter" <acar...@redhat.com> >> Cc: "Matthew Miller" <mat...@redhat.com>, "Michael McGrath" >> <mmcgr...@redhat.com>, "Dusty Mabe" <dm...@redhat.com>, >> "Adam Miller" <admil...@redhat.com> >> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 3:05:41 PM >> Subject: Re: Potential Atomic 2 Week Release blockers >> >> Can this discussion be in public at: >> >> https://lists.projectatomic.io/projectatomic-archives/atomic-devel/ >> >> ? >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> > Hey guys, Dusty has raised 2 bugs that he thinks should be considered >> > potential release blockers for the 2 week atomic release on Tuesday. Could >> > you guys comment on these bugs and whether or not we should hold the >> > release >> > for them? Also, how should escalations for blockers outside of our tests / >> > script be escalated more generally? >> > >> > -- >> > Amanda Carter >> > >> > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1276775 >> > [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1278984 >> > >> > > -- > Amanda Carter > -- Mike McGrath | mmcgr...@redhat.com | (312) 660-3547 Atomic | Red Hat Chicago | http://projectatomic.io/
