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

Jeremy Allison jra at
Fri Jun 15 17:03:24 MDT 2012

On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 09:03:21PM +0200, Karolin Seeger wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:06:50AM +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > The problem is, for each of us our pet feature is that certain key
> > feature :-).  I still hold that 'regression' is the only standard we can
> > all agree on. 
> I don't agree. I agree that your statement is valid in most cases, but
> there are some key features that must work IMHO. Maybe we need to write down
> these functionalities. Btw, when XP clients cannot be joined, it's a
> regression. 
> I would really like to hear Volker's and Jeremy's point of view regarding
> the regressions. In the past, I had several times the impression that we
> do need blocker bugs (and that the use of them was not abused).
> Maybe you guys would like to comment.

Yeah, I depend on blocker bugs in order to make sure critical
fixes don't get lost for a release.

They're essential, and not abused IMHO. If people disagree
they can (and do) mark them down from blocker.

This system works well IMHO.


More information about the samba-technical mailing list