Blockers in Bugfix-Releases (Re: [Release Planning 3.6] Samba 3.6.6 on May 31 (was May 24)?)

[Jeremy Allison]

On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 02:06:49PM +0200, Michael Adam wrote:
> 
> We have been there a couple of times, but we never reached
> a proper decision:
> 
> I have frequently announced my opinion that there can not be
> blocker bugs for bufix releases (i.e. version Samba X.Y.Z with Z > 0).
> The only exception for this might be the case of a regression
> that was introduced in version X.Z.(Z-1).
> (I might be convinced to accept "introduced X.Y.Z' with 0 <= Z' < Z",
>  but it might be hard.)
> In all other cases we have lived with the bug for some releases
> anyways, so why should it be a blocker now?
> 
> The background for re-raising the issue is that bugs marked as
> blockers for 3.6.6 (e.g., others as well) have managed to move
> the release date again and again.
> 
> Proposal:
> 
> So I am proposing to not accept bugs as blockers for a bugfix
> release, with the exception of a bug introduced in the previous
> bugfix release. If the bug is not fixed by the proposed release
> date then it will get into the next bugfix release afterwards
> (or the second next, ...)
> 
> Opinions?

-1. There are some bugs that are just so nasty I don't
want to have them even in a x.y.z release.

We just have to use judgement on them.

Jeremy.