Broken upgrade paths in F7

[Jesse Keating]

On Tuesday 15 May 2007 10:58:59 Patrice Dumas wrote:
> I think that there should be something done for the freeze and releases,
> but I am not happy with the current state, because it adds burden
> without real gain. It seems to me that the contributors should tag
> themselves what they think belongs to the release, and release engineer
> should only veto things they find unwise and/or ask on fedora-devel or
> fedora-maintainers for clarifications for packages they'd like to veto.
>
> How many tag to the release were rejected?

To be perfectly honest, I'm not completely happy with this process for the 
final freeze either.  This was an experiment for the Fedora 7 release, and it 
went really well for the test release freezes.  I agree that the final freeze 
should be done differently, however I didn't want to change it at this point.

Asking how many were rejected isn't quite fair.  It's not the people who are 
asking for tagging that I'm concerned with, it's the people who just don't 
realize we're in a freeze and happily drop in a soname bump that breaks a ton 
of packages or other such acts without noticing that we're in a freeze and 
doing such can cause problems with the release.  This has happened in the 
past, I'm not just being overly paranoid.  I very much want there to be less 
overhead, and I welcome any effort into the workflow that gets us there, but 
at the same time we have to be able to manage a freeze and have control over 
what gets in and what doesn't.  Striking the balance is very difficult to do.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20070515/16f22144/attachment.sig>