Daan, While I have the same opinion as you that "No one should be able to block a release on their own". I also agree that the issue should be posted to the ML for discussion and it is the responsibility of the person who posted the defect to do so.
I am more concerned with the process. My concern is specifically around this comment from Raja "If no one supports the defect/issue, we will be putting out a release that has showstopper issues." I mean for one, there should be a way for someone to flag an issue as blocker/showstopper and two, ensure that there is an explicit decision being made on the severity. To me it makes more sense to do this the other way round, that is, the person who found the issue raises the issue based on his understanding of the severity/impact. The person who is responsible for triaging (which in this case is the community) shall use their discretion to justify the severity and if it doesn't substantiate then downgrade/upgrade the same. Isn't this the general engineering practice? In addition, we'd have a guidelines on defect categorization for reference that can be looked up while raising a defect. Regards, Somesh -----Original Message----- From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 2:34 PM To: dev Subject: Re: Revisit Process for creating Blocker bugs -1 blocker means blocker and blocks a release. No one should be able to block a release on their own. We should treat the critical category as a staging area for those issues. On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Somesh Naidu <somesh.na...@citrix.com> wrote: > +1 > > Categorizing an issue as blocker/showstopper should need some kind of > moderation. One possibility, voting and/or require approval from certain # of > PMCs. Alternately, this could also be left to the discretion of the RM. > > Regards, > Somesh > > -----Original Message----- > From: Raja Pullela [mailto:raja.pull...@citrix.com] > Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 11:15 AM > To: CloudStack Dev > Subject: Revisit Process for creating Blocker bugs > > Hi, > > I am requesting to see if we can revisit the process for creating "blocker" > defects. I heard and do understand that someone can create a blocker defect > and may not actively involve in closing it out and it doesn't help the > product. I am not clear if we are doing this at and around RC time - however > it doesn't matter. > > IMHO, feel that someone's involvement should not be taken as a reason for > incorrectly categorizing a defect, meaning a blocker defect being created as > a Critical and opening up a discussion to review. If no one supports the > defect/issue, we will be putting out a release that has showstopper issues. > > Please share your thoughts and concerns for or against lifting this > restriction! > > Raja -- Daan
