misuto has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
misuto has joined #fedora-coreos
misuto has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
misuto has joined #fedora-coreos
jpn has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
misuto has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
misuto has joined #fedora-coreos
misuto has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
misuto has joined #fedora-coreos
misuto has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
misuto has joined #fedora-coreos
jpn has joined #fedora-coreos
misuto has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
misuto has joined #fedora-coreos
misuto has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
misuto has joined #fedora-coreos
misuto has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
misuto has joined #fedora-coreos
<dustymabe>
bgilbert: travier[m]: spresti: for those AWS changes should we open a separate ticket for each one of them or should we open a single ticket and enumerate them?
<dustymabe>
I can see value in both approaches
<travier[m]>
hum, good question
<travier[m]>
they are different changes, even though we'll roll them out at the same time
<travier[m]>
so I'd vote separate to make it easier to track (sorry more workà
<travier[m]>
s/workà/work)/
<dustymabe>
i'm just imagining that a single person is probably going to be the one doing the work (since it touches on the same pieces probably wouldn't make sense to have multiple people do it)
<travier[m]>
works for me too
<bgilbert>
tbh I'd do one ticket for all of them
<bgilbert>
it makes sense to develop & test them together
<bgilbert>
dustymabe: can you own updating our tracking (F39 ticket and/or separate ticket) for things to go in the release announcement?
<bgilbert>
the rebase tracker template doesn't say anything about a coreos-status post. if we want that to be part of the normal process, we should mention it explicitly, and say that there's a separate tracker issue
<dustymabe>
bgilbert: travier[m] one ticket for AWS work it is - spresti, did you say you'd open that ticket?