On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 10:13 AM Robie Basak <robie.basak@ubuntu.com> wrote:
> It's been a while since I did one of these. It takes a while to write it
> up that I could be spending on reviewing more SRUs, but I did also get
> feedback that my last post was helpful. So I'll try to continue doing
> these now and again.
Thanks for doing this. I find these helpful and educational too.
By learning more about the thinking/process behind SRU reviews
I can prepare SRUs accordingly in advance, to avoid round trips
where possible, and hopefully help the SRU reviewers handle it.
> Feedback: please make sure your upload is marked Fix Released in the
> development release before uploading, or if that's not possible, then
> there's an explanation in the bug.
A related topic/question.
I recently wondered/asked whether uploading to stable releases
while the development release is marked Fix _Committed_ was OK.
I received clarification that the SRU(s) may be _accepted_,
but not _released_, which is reasonable and does help SRUs
to move to -proposed for verification.
However, that may take review cycles on unapproved queues
or -proposed pocket, before SRUs can actually be released,
or more reviews if further stable upload(s) are needed w/
fixups found while in devel-proposed; thus more info
(e.g., importance/urgency) would be helpful to evaluate.
I had to ask someone, as this particular case doesn't seem
to be documented in [1, 2], so I wondered if it should?
(In case it may help others w/ the same question in the future,
and also document the rationale/considerations to be done.)
Say, something similar to the feedback you wrote (eg devel
is marked Fix Released, or Fix Committed if needed/reasons
described in a comment), plus consider additional uploads.
Thanks!
--
Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
