#1626 Release blocking deliverables for Fedora 25
Closed None Opened 5 years ago by pnemade.

= phenomenon =
Looking at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Program_Management/ReleaseBlocking/Fedora25 page, I see release blocking deliverables are not yet signed off by their responsible groups.

= background analysis =
There is no information given about by what milestone in Fedora release development cycle this release blocking wiki page be updated.

= implementation recommendation =
jkurik, Can you check with each such groups and have the wiki page updated with that information soon?

Please add this ticket to meeting when wiki page update is available.


I have requested review of these deliverables from Server WG, Cloud WG and Workstation WG. I will update this ticket once I receive feedback from these working groups.

Unfortunately the situation with Labs and Spins deliverables is a bit disorganized. The Spins SIG is not operational for some time and there is no clear ownership for some of these deliverables. Will FESCo be able to take ownership for these deliverables from the "blocking/non-blocking status" point of view ?

Replying to [comment:1 jkurik]:

I have requested review of these deliverables from Server WG, Cloud WG and Workstation WG. I will update this ticket once I receive feedback from these working groups.

Unfortunately the situation with Labs and Spins deliverables is a bit disorganized. The Spins SIG is not operational for some time and there is no clear ownership for some of these deliverables. Will FESCo be able to take ownership for these deliverables from the "blocking/non-blocking status" point of view ?

My proposal would be that if there is clearly no ownership for them then they are just as clearly non-blocking. It might be more productive to declare Labs and Spins no-blocking by default and address particular deliverables that wish to be blocking on a case-by-case basis as they are presented to FESCo by the Spin/Lab owners. (To be honest, I thought that was already the case.)

Replying to [comment:2 jwboyer]:

My proposal would be that if there is clearly no ownership for them then they are just as clearly non-blocking. It might be more productive to declare Labs and Spins no-blocking by default and address particular deliverables that wish to be blocking on a case-by-case basis as they are presented to FESCo by the Spin/Lab owners. (To be honest, I thought that was already the case.)

well, except for KDE you mean? :) Which has been grandfathered in as a release blocking media.

Replying to [comment:3 kevin]:

Replying to [comment:2 jwboyer]:

My proposal would be that if there is clearly no ownership for them then they are just as clearly non-blocking. It might be more productive to declare Labs and Spins no-blocking by default and address particular deliverables that wish to be blocking on a case-by-case basis as they are presented to FESCo by the Spin/Lab owners. (To be honest, I thought that was already the case.)

well, except for KDE you mean? :) Which has been grandfathered in as a release blocking media.

No, not except KDE. I mean, I'm fully aware that KDE is release blocking and I agree it should continue to be. However, if the KDE Spin ever does fall behind and has no clear owner and no SIG testing it and maintaining it then it needs to be dropped from release blocking status. I consider the grandfather status to simply be an already discussed and approved case of the case-by-case basis, not something written in stone and held to forever.

I see that we have got responses for Server, Workstation, Cloud workgroups and they are already signed off. Only KDE SIG response is remaining here.

AGREED: Accept the current status of Release blocking deliverables as given on its wiki page and close the ticket (+6,0,0)

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata