Scott Kitterman [2012-08-30 16:25 -0400]: > If we try and be too specific about criteria then we're going to get rules > lawyers complaining we didn't follow the criteria rather than applying common > sense. I see this happening with Feature Freeze exceptions, so I'm not > concerned about this at random. > > As long as it's general guidelines to give a broad expectation about what's > likely to happen, I think it's fine.
I agree. Stephane put it rather well in his reply. Any bug which causes the iso to not work at all (oversize, does not boot, installer crashes for a large number of people) or that has a bug which cannot be fixed with an upgrade (i. e. system does not boot or does not get network) needs a respin; I guess those are not challenged by anyone. However, as you said we might always have these bugs which technically could be fixed with an upgrade but are absurdly ugly, and perhaps even trivial to fix as well -- the release team should have the discrection and responsibility to respin on those as well; from my time at the release team I cannot remember a late respin that we did not clear with QA before. Martin -- Martin Pitt | http://www.piware.de Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org) -- Ubuntu-release mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-release
