[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       fedora-test-list
Subject:    Re: Non-image blocker process change proposal
From:       Kamil Paral <kparal () redhat ! com>
Date:       2016-02-29 9:42:59
Message-ID: 562776312.1258530.1456738979346.JavaMail.zimbra () redhat ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

> Hello folks,
> 
> I'd like to return to the high-level overview for this topic and discuss the
> changes we plan to do in our SOPs.

Since there was not much feedback, we agreed on a QA meeting that I'll just go ahead \
and draft all related SOP changes. Here we go:

1. SOP blocker bug process:
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AKparal%2FDraft%3ASOP_blocker_bug_process&diff=436236&oldid=435641


I've clarified that we should not close any blocker bug until the fix is pushed to a \
stable repo *and* also part of a TC/RC (if appropriate). If this is kept, it means we \
can easily look at the list of blockers and decide whether any type of blocker is \
still blocking us (some blocker bugs open) or not (all blocker bugs closed). This \
will be important in other SOPs.

Then I added the process of tracking AcceptedPreviousRelease fixes and verifying that \
the related updates repo metalink is in shape.

This document shares many templates with \
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process , but I do not \
intend to modify that one, so I might need you help, Adam, to modify the templates in \
such a way we adjust only one of the documents.


2. Go No Go Meeting
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AKparal%2FDraft%3AGo_No_Go_Meeting&diff=436242&oldid=435628


I wanted to avoid enumerating different types of blockers and their conditions here, \
so I use the previously described fact that any open blocker bugs should mean No Go, \
otherwise it means Go. But since people are not machines and mistakes will happen, I \
used "open or otherwise unaddressed accepted blocker bugs" to cover the case where we \
closed some bug sooner than it should have been, and it's still not addressed.

I also switched GOLD to GO, which seems to be an oversight from the past.



I went through these documents and found them not needing any adjustments:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_compose_request
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Blocker_Bug_FAQ


Do the changes look OK to you?

Thanks,
Kamil
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]