On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 18:28 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Bastien Nocera <had...@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. Cheers _______________________________________________ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
