On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, Matthias Clasen wrote: > On Tue, 2013-11-05 at 08:23 +0100, drago01 wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 3:03 AM, Adam Williamson > > <awill...@redhat.com<javascript:;>> > wrote: > > > On Sun, 2013-10-27 at 01:46 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > >> Adam Williamson wrote: > > >> > I don't think we'd really be correct in blocking the release for > such > > >> > issues - especially not Beta. We used to have 'polish' criteria for > > >> > Final which at least required the icons used in the system menus - > i.e. > > >> > what's specified in the app's .desktop file - to be sane for all > > >> > installed applications, but we dropped that (and other polish > criteria) > > >> > with the F19/F20 criteria re-write on the basis that they were > really > > >> > stretching a bit too far and would be unlikely to hold up to a 'last > > >> > blocker before release' acid test. Stuff like this doesn't break > > >> > anyone's use of the system catastrophically and can reasonably be > fixed > > >> > with updates. > > >> > > >> But it also affects the live images (making them look very > unpolished) and > > >> we don't respin those. > > > > > > That's why I said 'reasonably' not 'perfectly' :) I can see an argument > > > for blocking Final, though in practice, I don't think our current > > > standards are such that it really makes sense to claim our final > > > releases are so smooth as to be worth enforcing a high standard of > > > polish via the blocker mechanisms > > > > Then we should that. There is a difference between "perfect" and > something that > > looks obviously broken. > > Are we really fighting about the classification of fixed bugs here, >
Yes ;)
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
