Bug details: ** https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181367 ** Information from BlockerBugs App:
The votes have been last counted at 2023-03-24 19:12 UTC and the last processed comment was #comment-848295
To learn how to vote, see: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review A quick example: BetaBlocker +1 (where the tracker name is one of BetaBlocker/FinalBlocker/BetaFE/FinalFE/0Day/PreviousRelease and the vote is one of +1/0/-1)
BetaBlocker +1
BetaBlocker
FinalBlocker
BetaFE
FinalFE
0Day
PreviousRelease
+1
0
-1
The bug is real, the order seems random (I didn't check all the versions of the programs searched to see if it was selected using version number as a guide). In any case, this is not what fesco aproved for priority order. The change proposal approved says clearly: In the graphical software manager app, Flathub packages will only be selected by default when no Fedora package is available. and we see consistent examples where this does not apply. So, I think this realy is a blocker if one use the change aproved as the criterion.
I would stretch the application basic functionality criterion to accommodate this. It would be quite a stretch, but we should not release with Flathub if we don't consistently respect the FESCo decision.
FinalBlocker +1
Since FESCo explicitly required it, we should enforce that. Asking FESCo to formally vote on blocker status seems excessive, but if we need that for procedural nicety, I understand.
Metadata Update from @blockerbot: - Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)
Release F38 is no longer tracked by BlockerBugs, closing this ticket.
Log in to comment on this ticket.