Re: RFC: Spins process changes proposal

2013-08-21 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 08:45:59 +0100 Ian Malone wrote: > On 20 August 2013 19:29, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > Each approved spin MUST have at least 1 person fill in a basic spin > > test matrix for at least 1 TC or RC in order to be shipped with > > Alpha. > > > > If the image fails or there are no

Re: RFC: Spins process changes proposal

2013-08-21 Thread Ian Malone
On 20 August 2013 19:29, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Each approved spin MUST have at least 1 person fill in a basic spin > test matrix for at least 1 TC or RC in order to be shipped with Alpha. > > If the image fails or there are no test results maintainers can try > again at the next milestone, but the

Re: RFC: Spins process changes proposal

2013-08-20 Thread Dennis Gilmore
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 20:28:31 + "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 08/20/2013 07:59 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > Well, this change aims to at least see the QA part of that. > > If they have to do some QA, will a community step up to do so? > > The

Re: RFC: Spins process changes proposal

2013-08-20 Thread Dennis Gilmore
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 19:44:37 + "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 08/20/2013 07:32 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >> >Is it not better to come up with some kind of spin/mentor process > >> >with releng/infra where each spin sub-community learns,provid

Re: RFC: Spins process changes proposal

2013-08-20 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 08/20/2013 07:59 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: Well, this change aims to at least see the QA part of that. If they have to do some QA, will a community step up to do so? The sub-community would have to do the testing while the QA community would assist them in setting up the test matrix,release cr

Re: RFC: Spins process changes proposal

2013-08-20 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 19:44:37 + "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 08/20/2013 07:32 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >> >Is it not better to come up with some kind of spin/mentor process > >> >with releng/infra where each spin sub-community learns,provides > >> >and is ultimately reasonable for creat

Re: RFC: Spins process changes proposal

2013-08-20 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 08/20/2013 07:32 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >Is it not better to come up with some kind of spin/mentor process >with releng/infra where each spin sub-community learns,provides and >is ultimately reasonable for creating their own spins as opposed to >releng/infra wasting valuable time/resource host

Re: RFC: Spins process changes proposal

2013-08-20 Thread Matthew Miller
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 01:32:29PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > Is it not better to come up with some kind of spin/mentor process > > with releng/infra where each spin sub-community learns,provides and > > is ultimately reasonable for creating their own spins as opposed to > > releng/infra wastin

Re: RFC: Spins process changes proposal

2013-08-20 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 18:38:25 + "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > Is it not better to come up with some kind of spin/mentor process > with releng/infra where each spin sub-community learns,provides and > is ultimately reasonable for creating their own spins as opposed to > releng/infra wasting

Re: RFC: Spins process changes proposal

2013-08-20 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 08/20/2013 06:29 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: Greetings. I'd like to propose some changes to the spins process. I already posted to the spins and qa lists a while back and asked for feedback. I did get some good feedback from qa folks, but mostly crickets from spins maintainers, so I thought I woul