On 21/12/10 08:19, Carsten Munk wrote:
2010/12/21 Arjan van de Ven<[email protected]>
On 12/20/2010 9:53 PM, Kangkai Yin wrote:
Hi,
Adding new package kernel-adaptation-oaktrail in project Trunk:Testing.
Please review and accept ASAP.
Justification for this new package:
The kernel for Oaktrail, fix #BMC 11588
ok this is getting silly
opening dummy bugs just to get past the paperwork, just so you can claim
you "fixed" a bug...
our bureaucrazy has gone waaaay too far.
We're in a development window, not in a "code freeze strict bugfixes only"
part of the schedule!
Does that mean people get to "just add new kernels" in a development window?
Well, and we're side-stepping program management totally by having those
dummy bugs. A new package should be a FEA# and approved by program
management as per
http://wiki.meego.com/Release_Engineering/Process#Package_quality_expectations_for_submissions_into_.2A:Testing_projects
Either we start enforcing it for everything or we have to modify the rules
to fit reality... Proposals welcome?
Isn't that the point of this. The process just found a clearly bogus change to a
package. There is no valid bug being addressed and no feature logged. Who is
responsible for 'oaktrail'.
At this point I'd expect release engineering to chew out Kangkai for committing
this change with a clearly bogus bug.
If the management team responsible for features is the problem - fix that! Don't
break the engineering.
David
--
"Don't worry, you'll be fine; I saw it work in a cartoon once..."
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-packaging mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-packaging
