On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 10:59 PM Ben Cotton <bcot...@redhat.com> wrote:
> I want to address a few comments in particular: > > > Kevin Fenzi: > > I'm prefer to add a new milestone of 'day before release' and put it > > there. > > The current schedule starts the "create the release announcement" on > the day of the Go/No-Go meeting. I don't think that makes much sense: > the announcement can be pre-written and edited to track changes in > release dates or Changes status. I'll go ahead and move that to *end* > on the Go/No-Go day. My concern remains what happens if the > announcement isn't ready by the deadline? We either proceed like we've > done in the past and risk a rush to publish at the end, or we declare > the release No-Go, in which case there's no practical difference from > what I propose. > > > Adam Williamson (out of order) > > 1. I'm fine with the overall release process blocking, in some sense, > > on things like release announcements not being done. > > > > 3. The Go/No-Go meeting is not necessarily the best place to decide on > > this, but I'm open to it being chosen. > > The Go/No-Go meeting is the only real decision point we have, so IMO > it makes sense to add this in there. The Release Readiness Meeting is > more informative than decision-making (although it sounds like it may > be time to revisit that meeting more broadly, so maybe we change > this?) > > > More Adam Williamson > > 2. I believe this should **NOT** be handled through the things actually > > called the "Fedora Release Criteria" and the process for nominating and > > reviewing "release blocker" bugs. > > Agreed. To be clear, that is not what I am proposing. I've probably > been sloppy in my wording, but I'm thinking of this as a criterion > exclusively for the Go/No-Go process. > > > Mohan Boddu > > I guess we can just consider as a soft criteria and if its not ready, we > will just ask > people to help marketing team and get the article ready by Friday or > Monday. > > Right. If it's "close" (for some value of close) then Marketing can > say they are go and get it finished by Monday. Of course, the > counter-argument to this is that a squishy criterion that we can just > accept if we want to isn't much of a criterion. > I like this. I read this as we are "no-go" if marketing is no-go. If they are "go" and we don't like their definition of go, let's take it up with them when it happens. regards, bex > > -- > Ben Cotton > Fedora Program Manager > TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > -- Brian (bex) Exelbierd | bexel...@redhat.com | b...@pobox.com Fedora Community Action & Impact Coordinator @bexelbie | http://www.winglemeyer.org
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
