[gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

Hello!


I'm surprised that there is no keyword in Gentoo's bugzilla [1] to mark
bugs for bugday.  Is there a good reason why such a keyword does not
exist?  Would it be hard to set up?

Thanks,



Sebastian


[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/describekeywords.cgi

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Roy Bamford]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 714 bytes --]

On 2010.02.27 04:18, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> 
> I'm surprised that there is no keyword in Gentoo's bugzilla [1] to
> mark
> bugs for bugday.  Is there a good reason why such a keyword does not
> exist?  Would it be hard to set up?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> 
> Sebastian
> 
> 
> [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/describekeywords.cgi
> 
> 
Sebastian,

That sounds good. If it were an enumerated type bugs could be graded 
for bugday too.

.e.g. 
Novice
You need to have fixed a few
Intermediate
We don't have a clue.

I'm not suggesting any grades - those are just for illustration.

-- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(Neddyseagoon) an member of
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
trustees


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

On 02/27/10 16:39, Roy Bamford wrote:
> That sounds good. If it were an enumerated type bugs could be graded 
> for bugday too.
> 
> .e.g. 
> Novice
> You need to have fixed a few
> Intermediate
> We don't have a clue.
> 
> I'm not suggesting any grades - those are just for illustration.

I had that idea too and found it not too helpful.
Potential issues:

 - Difficulity can be very subjective

 - Introducing new "levels" later doesn't work well
   as we'd manually have to go through each bug "left"
   or "right" of that new level.  So we'd have to get it
   very right the first time.



Sebastian

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Mark Loeser]

Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> said:
> Hello!
> 
> 
> I'm surprised that there is no keyword in Gentoo's bugzilla [1] to mark
> bugs for bugday.  Is there a good reason why such a keyword does not
> exist?  Would it be hard to set up?

I think the goal was to have http://bugday.gentoo.org/ fill this role
instead of polluting bugzie with more keywords.  I'm not really attached
to one approach over the other, but atleast this little site gives the
users one place to have to check for things and we can categorize them
easily.

-- 
Mark Loeser
email         -   halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
email         -   mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web           -   http://www.halcy0n.com

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

On 02/27/10 17:22, Mark Loeser wrote:
> I think the goal was to have http://bugday.gentoo.org/ fill this role

whenever i visit bugday.gentoo.org it takes minutes to load.
afair for the two bugdays i participated it didn't display anything
helpful (to me), especially: why does it show fixed bugs, too?  about
half of them are fixed.

section "new, requests for ebuilds, or just a version bump" doesn't have
a single bug after 2006, that's how "new" it is.


> instead of polluting bugzie with more keywords.

would a single keyword be pollution?


> I'm not really attached
> to one approach over the other, but atleast this little site gives the
> users one place to have to check for things and we can categorize them
> easily.

what i see as an advantage of the bugzilla-keyword approach is that any
developer can contribute: everyone (especially bug wranglers) can mark
bugs for bugday easily from bugzilla.

bugday.gentoo.org could still be used as an entry point showing these bugs.



sebastian

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Roy Bamford]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 802 bytes --]

On 2010.02.27 17:38, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
[snip]

> what i see as an advantage of the bugzilla-keyword approach is that
> any
> developer can contribute: everyone (especially bug wranglers) can 
> mark
> bugs for bugday easily from bugzilla.
> 
> bugday.gentoo.org could still be used as an entry point showing these
> bugs.
> 
> 
> 
> sebastian
> 


Sebastian,

What would be the criteria for marking a bug as bugday?

Why whould it be any better than a properly maintained 
bugday.gentoo.org page, which also tried to classify bugs.

The last few times I've dropped into bugday, its been very quiet, which 
suggests its in need of some tlc but maybe its just my timezone.

-- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(Neddyseagoon) an member of
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
trustees


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

On 02/27/10 19:14, Roy Bamford wrote:
> What would be the criteria for marking a bug as bugday?

I would say something along a "yes" to

  Could this task fit for being solved by someone who
  is not a Gentoo developer?

It's not precise, does it need to be?


> Why whould it be any better than a properly maintained 
> bugday.gentoo.org page, which also tried to classify bugs.

As I said: with this keyword every Gentoo dev can help classifying.
Lower risk on bottlenecks/delays and manpower.


> The last few times I've dropped into bugday, its been very quiet, which 
> suggests its in need of some tlc but maybe its just my timezone.

Sorry, what's "tlc"?  Next Saturday is a bugday date again, btw.



Sebastian

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Dale]

chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
>
> Sorry, what's "tlc"?  Next Saturday is a bugday date again, btw.
>
>
>
> Sebastian
>
>
>    

Tender Loving Care.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Mark Loeser]

Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@gentoo.org> said:
> The last few times I've dropped into bugday, its been very quiet, which 
> suggests its in need of some tlc but maybe its just my timezone.

Its been pretty much dead.  We need more developer involvement so users
can actually talk to them and help resolve issues.  If we can't get
enough developers to participate then we should just stop trying to do
it instead of putting on such a poor showing.

-- 
Mark Loeser
email         -   halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
email         -   mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web           -   http://www.halcy0n.com

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Ben de Groot]

On 27 February 2010 21:48, Mark Loeser <halcy0n@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@gentoo.org> said:
>> The last few times I've dropped into bugday, its been very quiet, which
>> suggests its in need of some tlc but maybe its just my timezone.
>
> Its been pretty much dead.  We need more developer involvement so users
> can actually talk to them and help resolve issues.  If we can't get
> enough developers to participate then we should just stop trying to do
> it instead of putting on such a poor showing.

I would like to be involved but not in the current disorganized form. Our
#gentoo-bugs channel topic still refers to the thoroughly outdated
bugsday.g.o page, and I can't edit either of them.

We need an easier interface to mark bugs to be tackled on bugday,
and I like Sebastian's proposal for that. The idea for the bugsday.g.o
page is good, but it needs to be brought up-to-date and accessible
to all devs. Low barriers to participation and all that. And even devs
who cannot take part on the day itself could participate by requesting
certain bugs or issues to be tackled.

Also, participating devs should get permission to commit easy fixes
for packages they don't maintain (the other thread about commit
policies is relevant here). Obviously issues that are more involved
need to be passed on to the proper maintainers.

I think if we can get a few devs and possibly some users together
to organize this in a better way, this could be useful. But if things
are to stay the way they are, then we better stop pretending.

Cheers,
-- 
Ben de Groot
Gentoo Linux developer (qt, media, lxde, desktop-misc)
______________________________________________________

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Mark Loeser]

Ben de Groot <yngwin@gentoo.org> said:
> > Its been pretty much dead.  We need more developer involvement so users
> > can actually talk to them and help resolve issues.  If we can't get
> > enough developers to participate then we should just stop trying to do
> > it instead of putting on such a poor showing.
> 
> I would like to be involved but not in the current disorganized form. Our
> #gentoo-bugs channel topic still refers to the thoroughly outdated
> bugsday.g.o page, and I can't edit either of them.

I can modify the channel topic for you.  I should have a login for the
bugsday.g.o page somewhere, if not...I'm sure we can get one.

> We need an easier interface to mark bugs to be tackled on bugday,
> and I like Sebastian's proposal for that. The idea for the bugsday.g.o
> page is good, but it needs to be brought up-to-date and accessible
> to all devs. Low barriers to participation and all that. And even devs
> who cannot take part on the day itself could participate by requesting
> certain bugs or issues to be tackled.

If you want to take the lead on this, come and talk to me on IRC and let
me know what ideas you have.  I'd love to see it take off, but I don't
have the time to put towards it myself.

> Also, participating devs should get permission to commit easy fixes
> for packages they don't maintain (the other thread about commit
> policies is relevant here). Obviously issues that are more involved
> need to be passed on to the proper maintainers.

This is something we'll have to be careful of and discuss what types of
changes can be done.  Not everything needs to be necessarily fixed in
the tree though, helping users get proper patches onto bugs can be just
as good and help get more useful contributions from those users in the
future.  Consider it an opportunity to train possible new developers.

> I think if we can get a few devs and possibly some users together
> to organize this in a better way, this could be useful. But if things
> are to stay the way they are, then we better stop pretending.

I couldn't agree more.

-- 
Mark Loeser
email         -   halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
email         -   mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web           -   http://www.halcy0n.com

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Dawid Węgliński]

On Sunday 28 February 2010 00:14:36 Mark Loeser wrote:
> Ben de Groot <yngwin@gentoo.org> said:
> > > Its been pretty much dead.  We need more developer involvement so users
> > > can actually talk to them and help resolve issues.  If we can't get
> > > enough developers to participate then we should just stop trying to do
> > > it instead of putting on such a poor showing.
> > 
> > I would like to be involved but not in the current disorganized form. Our
> > #gentoo-bugs channel topic still refers to the thoroughly outdated
> > bugsday.g.o page, and I can't edit either of them.
> 
> I can modify the channel topic for you.  I should have a login for the
> bugsday.g.o page somewhere, if not...I'm sure we can get one.
> 

welp transfered #gentoo-bugs to you last time when i asked him, so you are now  
the owner. But every developer can change topic by /msg chanserv topic 
#gentoo-bugs 

-- 
Cheers
Dawid Węgliński

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Alexander Færøy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1164 bytes --]

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 06:38:57PM +0100, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> bugday.gentoo.org could still be used as an entry point showing these bugs.

http://bugday.gentoo.org/ would easily be made able to show bugs with a
specific Bugzilla keyword only. If I recall correctly, we had to do some
very naughty things back when Gentoo changed the Bugzilla system to run
with a MySQL cluster as backend. Back in the early days of Bugday, the
site queried the database directly, but these days it uses Bugzilla's
XML API for all the requests, which is why it takes forever to load the
page. We did spend one Bugday making it a bit faster though, but it's
still not fast enough (yes, it was even worse before that). A rewrite
with a cache would probably not be a bad idea and it would be an easy
task for any user who wants to contribute with something useful :)

Until then, it would probably be a good idea to clean up the ACL of
http://bugday.gentoo.org/. I'm still able to log in using my ancient
username and password, and I can see on the accesslist that there are
multiple former developers who still has access to the site.

-- 
Alexander Færøy

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 566 bytes --]

On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 05:18:39 +0100
Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> wrote:

> I'm surprised that there is no keyword in Gentoo's bugzilla [1] to mark
> bugs for bugday.  Is there a good reason why such a keyword does not
> exist?  Would it be hard to set up?

I would use it.  I honestly didn't know we still did bugdays. :/


-- 
fonts,                                            by design, by neglect
gcc-porting,                              for a fact or just for effect
wxwidgets @ gentoo     EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Markos Chandras]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 652 bytes --]

On Saturday 27 February 2010 06:18:39 Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> 
> I'm surprised that there is no keyword in Gentoo's bugzilla [1] to mark
> bugs for bugday.  Is there a good reason why such a keyword does not
> exist?  Would it be hard to set up?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> 
> Sebastian
> 
> 
> [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/describekeywords.cgi
Do we still have bugdays? Who is taking care of this project and the 
respective webpage? I think we first need to answer these questions before we 
even consider resurrect this project
-- 
Markos Chandras (hwoarang)
Gentoo Linux Developer
Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

On 02/28/10 20:54, Markos Chandras wrote:
> Do we still have bugdays? Who is taking care of this project and the 
> respective webpage? I think we first need to answer these questions before we 
> even consider resurrect this project

welp         -> away
deathwing00  -> mail contact with me
gurligebis   -> no reply yet

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Joshua Saddler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 510 bytes --]

On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 21:04:04 +0100
Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 02/28/10 20:54, Markos Chandras wrote:
> > Do we still have bugdays? Who is taking care of this project and the 
> > respective webpage? I think we first need to answer these questions before
> > we even consider resurrect this project
> 
> welp         -> away

He's not away, he's retired. It's just taken several months to close his bug.

> gurligebis   -> no reply yet

I thought gurli was also retired.


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Ioannis Aslanidis]

Hello,

After having a talk with Sebastien (aka sping), I think it is time to
give a clear reply from my side to this discussion, given that I am
still a member of the project and I am willing to rescue it.

At this moment, the Bugday Project is starving because no one feeds
it. It needs to eat bugs, so before anything let's fill up the plate
with as many of them as possible.

In order to do this, we need to change a few things here and there so
that the bugs flow correctly towards the project.

The first thing that would help us a lot is to actually have a keyword
'bugday' in our bugzilla. This will definitely help us out a lot when
managing all the tickets and be able to produce some sort of report.

The second thing that comes to my mind is pretty internal, but
requires some external interaction. We need to work ahead of the Bug
Day and be capable of having everything needed ready. Having the
proper tools is very important for this task, and getting control of
bugday.gentoo.org and be able to upload our own content would be
great. It's a virtual apache host running in the same place as
bugs.gentoo.org, as it requires access to the database (although this
does not necessarily need to be like this if the database is
accessible through the network).

The third thing that we need is the proper audience. We need more PR.
My proposal here is to start with an announcement two weeks before the
Bug Day, followed by an announcement the week before and a reminder
the day before. This needs to happen in publicly visible places (and
has happened in some of them as far as I recall): forums, gentoo-user,
gentoo-dev, gentoo-announce, gentoo-dev-announce, the newsletter
(dead?) and the website. Having people related to the Bug Day project
posting to their blogs can help a lot in this case as well.

The fourth thing, is to actually get the proper information in the
proper format. We need a compromise from each of the teams, so that
they send us at least one bug every month that can be delegated to our
users. Then the Bugday Project can decide whether the bug is
appropriate or not for delegation, and tag it with the
before-mentioned 'bugday' keyword. The teams should send the list of
bugs, with each bug filling a skeleton similar to the following:

 * Ticket number.
 * Title.
 * Clear, easy to understand, short description of what we want to
delegate to our users.
 * Topic of the task (as in networking, C/C++, python, ebuild, etc.).
 * Difficulty of the task.
 * Detailed step-by-step description of the task.

Let me hear of what you have to say to all this.

Regards.


If we have this piece of information, we can organize ourselves better.
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 2:35 AM, Joshua Saddler <nightmorph@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 21:04:04 +0100
> Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
>> On 02/28/10 20:54, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> > Do we still have bugdays? Who is taking care of this project and the
>> > respective webpage? I think we first need to answer these questions before
>> > we even consider resurrect this project
>>
>> welp         -> away
>
> He's not away, he's retired. It's just taken several months to close his bug.
>
>> gurligebis   -> no reply yet
>
> I thought gurli was also retired.
>
>



-- 
Ioannis Aslanidis
http://www.deathwing00.org
<deathwing00[at]gentoo.org> 0x47F370A0

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Ben de Groot]

On 1 March 2010 22:17, Ioannis Aslanidis <aslanidis@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]

Great ideas!

> The teams should send the list of
> bugs, with each bug filling a skeleton similar to the following:
>
>  * Ticket number.
>  * Title.
>  * Clear, easy to understand, short description of what we want to
> delegate to our users.
>  * Topic of the task (as in networking, C/C++, python, ebuild, etc.).
>  * Difficulty of the task.
>  * Detailed step-by-step description of the task.

This will not work. You need to keep things really simple for our devs.
I don't see anybody but the most dedicated ones, who also happen
to have a lot of time on their hands, fill out such a detailed form.

I'd say let devs just nominate bugs, either by adding BugDay to
the keywords field or something similar, or by passing the bugday
team a list of bug numbers. Then the bugday team can sort these
and see if any instructions are needed. They could always ask the
involved devs/teams for more info when necessary.

Cheers,
-- 
Ben de Groot
Gentoo Linux developer (qt, media, lxde, desktop-misc)
______________________________________________________

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Ioannis Aslanidis]

I understand that the implication and the time demand of this last
point may be a little excessive. If anyone still has the time to fill
the skeleton in, they are still welcome to do it. Otherwise with the
bug list it will be enough. I would prefer to keep the keyword for
Bugday Members to administer.

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 11:19 PM, Ben de Groot <yngwin@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 1 March 2010 22:17, Ioannis Aslanidis <aslanidis@gmail.com> wrote:
>> [...]
>
> Great ideas!
>
>> The teams should send the list of
>> bugs, with each bug filling a skeleton similar to the following:
>>
>>  * Ticket number.
>>  * Title.
>>  * Clear, easy to understand, short description of what we want to
>> delegate to our users.
>>  * Topic of the task (as in networking, C/C++, python, ebuild, etc.).
>>  * Difficulty of the task.
>>  * Detailed step-by-step description of the task.
>
> This will not work. You need to keep things really simple for our devs.
> I don't see anybody but the most dedicated ones, who also happen
> to have a lot of time on their hands, fill out such a detailed form.
>
> I'd say let devs just nominate bugs, either by adding BugDay to
> the keywords field or something similar, or by passing the bugday
> team a list of bug numbers. Then the bugday team can sort these
> and see if any instructions are needed. They could always ask the
> involved devs/teams for more info when necessary.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Ben de Groot
> Gentoo Linux developer (qt, media, lxde, desktop-misc)
> ______________________________________________________
>
>



-- 
Ioannis Aslanidis
http://www.deathwing00.org
<deathwing00[at]gentoo.org> 0x47F370A0

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

Quoting Ioannis Aslanidis <aslanidis@gmail.com>:
> I would prefer to keep the keyword for
> Bugday Members to administer.

I don't think that sending mails would work well.
If you want extra control/QA for bugday team members
I would propose two different keywords: one for bugday
candidates and one for confirmed bugday bugs.

Any dev could mark bugs as candidates easily and without
delays while you could still reserve acknoledgement to you.



Sebastian

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Ioannis Aslanidis]

That sounds great!

On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 1:02 AM, Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> Quoting Ioannis Aslanidis <aslanidis@gmail.com>:
>>
>> I would prefer to keep the keyword for
>> Bugday Members to administer.
>
> I don't think that sending mails would work well.
> If you want extra control/QA for bugday team members
> I would propose two different keywords: one for bugday
> candidates and one for confirmed bugday bugs.
>
> Any dev could mark bugs as candidates easily and without
> delays while you could still reserve acknoledgement to you.
>
>
>
> Sebastian
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Ioannis Aslanidis
http://www.deathwing00.org
<deathwing00[at]gentoo.org> 0x47F370A0

[gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[Duncan]

Sebastian Pipping posted on Tue, 02 Mar 2010 01:02:05 +0100 as excerpted:

> Quoting Ioannis Aslanidis <aslanidis@gmail.com>:
>> I would prefer to keep the keyword for Bugday Members to administer.
> 
> I don't think that sending mails would work well. If you want extra
> control/QA for bugday team members I would propose two different
> keywords: one for bugday candidates and one for confirmed bugday bugs.
> 
> Any dev could mark bugs as candidates easily and without delays while
> you could still reserve acknoledgement to you.

... And here I'm proposing three:

BUGDAY		(nomination)
BUGDAY-ACCEPTED	(or whatever is thought appropriate)
NOBUGDAY	(or BUGDAY-DECLINED, or BUGDAY-REFUSED, or...)

The latter would be for nominated bugs that were declined as inappropriate 
for whatever reason, to help prevent them being nominated again.  
Presumably there'd be a comment added explaining why as well, but the 
keyword would be what shows up in someone's face if they're thinking about 
keywording it BUGDAY.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[Alec Warner]

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
> Sebastian Pipping posted on Tue, 02 Mar 2010 01:02:05 +0100 as excerpted:
>
>> Quoting Ioannis Aslanidis <aslanidis@gmail.com>:
>>> I would prefer to keep the keyword for Bugday Members to administer.
>>
>> I don't think that sending mails would work well. If you want extra
>> control/QA for bugday team members I would propose two different
>> keywords: one for bugday candidates and one for confirmed bugday bugs.
>>
>> Any dev could mark bugs as candidates easily and without delays while
>> you could still reserve acknoledgement to you.
>
> ... And here I'm proposing three:
>
> BUGDAY          (nomination)
> BUGDAY-ACCEPTED (or whatever is thought appropriate)
> NOBUGDAY        (or BUGDAY-DECLINED, or BUGDAY-REFUSED, or...)

I think the last one is over-engineering a bit; bugzilla keywords are
not permanent so this will likely not help as much as one may think in
practice. Old bugday keywords are visible in the activity trail.

-A

>
> The latter would be for nominated bugs that were declined as inappropriate
> for whatever reason, to help prevent them being nominated again.
> Presumably there'd be a comment added explaining why as well, but the
> keyword would be what shows up in someone's face if they're thinking about
> keywording it BUGDAY.
>
> --
> Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
> "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
> and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman
>
>
>

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

On 03/02/10 02:32, Alec Warner wrote:
>> BUGDAY          (nomination)
>> BUGDAY-ACCEPTED (or whatever is thought appropriate)
>> NOBUGDAY        (or BUGDAY-DECLINED, or BUGDAY-REFUSED, or...)
> 
> I think the last one is over-engineering a bit; bugzilla keywords are
> not permanent

How are they not permanent?



Sebastian

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

On 03/02/10 02:09, Duncan wrote:
> ... And here I'm proposing three:
> 
> BUGDAY		(nomination)
> BUGDAY-ACCEPTED	(or whatever is thought appropriate)
> NOBUGDAY	(or BUGDAY-DECLINED, or BUGDAY-REFUSED, or...)
> 
> The latter would be for nominated bugs that were declined as inappropriate 
> for whatever reason, to help prevent them being nominated again.  
> Presumably there'd be a comment added explaining why as well, but the 
> keyword would be what shows up in someone's face if they're thinking about 
> keywording it BUGDAY.

I agree that it would be useful.

Especially if we have bugs where an assignee wants to take care of the
bug himself (including his own scheduling), we could run into
bugday-keyword wars:

 1) add keyword
 2) remove keyword
 3) overlook previous removal
 4) goto <1>

To make naming a bit more consistent, how about:
- BUGDAY-CANDIDATE
- BUGDAY-ACCEPTED
- BUGDAY-REFUSED

They're a bit long but I think it's worth to not have them crippled down
to stuff like "BDYES", "BDNO" and "BDMAYBE".



Sebastian

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[Ulrich Mueller]

>>>>> On Tue, 02 Mar 2010, Sebastian Pipping wrote:

> To make naming a bit more consistent, how about:
> - BUGDAY-CANDIDATE
> - BUGDAY-ACCEPTED
> - BUGDAY-REFUSED

> They're a bit long but I think it's worth to not have them crippled
> down to stuff like "BDYES", "BDNO" and "BDMAYBE".

This looks like overkill to me. One keyword should be enough, and for
supplementary information "Status Whiteboard" could be used.

Ulrich

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[Nathan Zachary]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 667 bytes --]

On 02/03/10 13:17, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 02 Mar 2010, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
>>>>>>             
>   
>> To make naming a bit more consistent, how about:
>> - BUGDAY-CANDIDATE
>> - BUGDAY-ACCEPTED
>> - BUGDAY-REFUSED
>>     
>   
>> They're a bit long but I think it's worth to not have them crippled
>> down to stuff like "BDYES", "BDNO" and "BDMAYBE".
>>     
> This looks like overkill to me. One keyword should be enough, and for
> supplementary information "Status Whiteboard" could be used.
>
> Ulrich
>
>   
I agree.  Simply having the BUGDAY keyword should be sufficient, and
more information can be provided elsewhere in the report.

--Zach

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1475 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

On 03/02/10 20:28, Nathan Zachary wrote:
>> This looks like overkill to me. One keyword should be enough, and for
>> supplementary information "Status Whiteboard" could be used.
>>   
> I agree.  Simply having the BUGDAY keyword should be sufficient, and
> more information can be provided elsewhere in the report.

If more than one keyword is commonly considered overkill I would at
least request the whiteboard for it: "somewhere in the report" involves
more than zero searching for it.



Sebastian

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[Nathan Zachary]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 628 bytes --]

On 02/03/10 13:39, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> On 03/02/10 20:28, Nathan Zachary wrote:
>   
>>> This looks like overkill to me. One keyword should be enough, and for
>>> supplementary information "Status Whiteboard" could be used.
>>>   
>>>       
>> I agree.  Simply having the BUGDAY keyword should be sufficient, and
>> more information can be provided elsewhere in the report.
>>     
> If more than one keyword is commonly considered overkill I would at
> least request the whiteboard for it: "somewhere in the report" involves
> more than zero searching for it.
>
>
>
> Sebastian
>
>   
Point taken, and I agree.

--Zach

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1115 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[Robert Buchholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1258 bytes --]

On Tuesday 02 March 2010, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> On 03/02/10 20:28, Nathan Zachary wrote:
> >> This looks like overkill to me. One keyword should be enough, and
> >> for supplementary information "Status Whiteboard" could be used.
> >
> > I agree.  Simply having the BUGDAY keyword should be sufficient,
> > and more information can be provided elsewhere in the report.
> 
> If more than one keyword is commonly considered overkill I would at
> least request the whiteboard for it: "somewhere in the report"
>  involves more than zero searching for it.

Some people use the whiteboard for their own marking of bugs (e.g. 
security, and myself). If you add more information in there, you might 
be breaking other people's marking / sorting algorithms.

I'd say one keyword BUGDAY is enough. Any bug editor can set and remove 
it and the bug history will show who set and removed it when. Sorting 
any syntax is taken care of by Bugzilla that way. It seems to me problem 
you seem to try to solve (review of bugs) can also be tackled with tools 
displaying new bugs that have the keyword set and just removing the 
keyword. If bugs are repeatedly spammed with BUGDAY comments, talk to 
the spammers or leave a comment.



Robert

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[Ioannis Aslanidis]

Well, I personally would prefer to have two keywords at least, one for
candidates and another for confirmed bugs. Otherwise it will be a real
trouble for us to sort things out. If adding more than one keywords
breaks anything, then I can tell you now it is already broken.

The only thing that could make me thing that one keyword is enough, is
that an actual comment is added every time a keyword is being added or
removed off a bug, to be able to keep track of these changes.

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Robert Buchholz <rbu@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 March 2010, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
>> On 03/02/10 20:28, Nathan Zachary wrote:
>> >> This looks like overkill to me. One keyword should be enough, and
>> >> for supplementary information "Status Whiteboard" could be used.
>> >
>> > I agree.  Simply having the BUGDAY keyword should be sufficient,
>> > and more information can be provided elsewhere in the report.
>>
>> If more than one keyword is commonly considered overkill I would at
>> least request the whiteboard for it: "somewhere in the report"
>>  involves more than zero searching for it.
>
> Some people use the whiteboard for their own marking of bugs (e.g.
> security, and myself). If you add more information in there, you might
> be breaking other people's marking / sorting algorithms.
>
> I'd say one keyword BUGDAY is enough. Any bug editor can set and remove
> it and the bug history will show who set and removed it when. Sorting
> any syntax is taken care of by Bugzilla that way. It seems to me problem
> you seem to try to solve (review of bugs) can also be tackled with tools
> displaying new bugs that have the keyword set and just removing the
> keyword. If bugs are repeatedly spammed with BUGDAY comments, talk to
> the spammers or leave a comment.
>
>
>
> Robert
>



-- 
Ioannis Aslanidis
http://www.deathwing00.org
<deathwing00[at]gentoo.org> 0x47F370A0

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[David Leverton]

On Saturday 06 March 2010 15:26:10 Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
> Well, I personally would prefer to have two keywords at least, one for
> candidates and another for confirmed bugs.

This sounds like the sort of thing Bugzilla's "flags" mechanism is for.

http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/2.22/html/flags-overview.html

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[Ioannis Aslanidis]

Now that's what I wanted. Thanks!

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:09 PM, David Leverton <levertond@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday 06 March 2010 15:26:10 Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
>> Well, I personally would prefer to have two keywords at least, one for
>> candidates and another for confirmed bugs.
>
> This sounds like the sort of thing Bugzilla's "flags" mechanism is for.
>
> http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/2.22/html/flags-overview.html
>
>



-- 
Ioannis Aslanidis
http://www.deathwing00.org
<deathwing00[at]gentoo.org> 0x47F370A0

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

On 03/06/10 20:09, David Leverton wrote:
> This sounds like the sort of thing Bugzilla's "flags" mechanism is for.
> 
> http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/2.22/html/flags-overview.html

Good idea!

What I wonder now is:
- Will it work with our very instance of Bugzilla?
- Can certain flag states be required when searching?
- Can we get their current value out using ctype=rdf output

All "yes" makes it work.



Sebastian

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[David Leverton]

On Sunday 07 March 2010 04:30:55 Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> What I wonder now is:
> - Will it work with our very instance of Bugzilla?

The security team uses (or at least has used in the past) flags on Gentoo 
Bugzilla.

> - Can certain flag states be required when searching?

It looks like you need to use the "Advanced Searching Using Boolean Charts" 
section on the search page - you can select "Flag", "is equal to", and type 
the flag name/state, for example "Assigned_To?" for one of the 
above-mentioned security flags.  Note that the "normal" search fields still 
apply, so you need to deselect all the options in the "Status" list before 
that particular example will produce any results.

> - Can we get their current value out using ctype=rdf output

I don't think you can with the RDF, but the "XML" button on the search results 
page includes the flags (and a whole lot of other information), so if you're 
going to rewrite the bugday software anyway you could consider using that 
instead, if it would give sufficient benefit.  It seems that if you're 
requesting it programmatically you'd have to do the search, get the bug IDs 
and explicitly pass them to the XML generator, though, which makes things a 
little more awkward.

[gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 755 bytes --]

On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 19:09:28 +0000
David Leverton <levertond@googlemail.com> wrote:

> On Saturday 06 March 2010 15:26:10 Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
> > Well, I personally would prefer to have two keywords at least, one for
> > candidates and another for confirmed bugs.
> 
> This sounds like the sort of thing Bugzilla's "flags" mechanism is for.
> 
> http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/2.22/html/flags-overview.html


We've also talked about using flags for arch testing:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213514


-- 
fonts,                                            by design, by neglect
gcc-porting,                              for a fact or just for effect
wxwidgets @ gentoo     EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[George Prowse]

On 01/03/2010 22:19, Ben de Groot wrote:
> On 1 March 2010 22:17, Ioannis Aslanidis<aslanidis@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> [...]
>
> Great ideas!
>
>> The teams should send the list of
>> bugs, with each bug filling a skeleton similar to the following:
>>
>>   * Ticket number.
>>   * Title.
>>   * Clear, easy to understand, short description of what we want to
>> delegate to our users.
>>   * Topic of the task (as in networking, C/C++, python, ebuild, etc.).
>>   * Difficulty of the task.
>>   * Detailed step-by-step description of the task.
>
> This will not work. You need to keep things really simple for our devs.
> I don't see anybody but the most dedicated ones, who also happen
> to have a lot of time on their hands, fill out such a detailed form.
>
> I'd say let devs just nominate bugs, either by adding BugDay to
> the keywords field or something similar, or by passing the bugday
> team a list of bug numbers. Then the bugday team can sort these
> and see if any instructions are needed. They could always ask the
> involved devs/teams for more info when necessary.
>
> Cheers,

You don't need to make it compulsory to fill out those fields and if 
just 1 out of every 10 or 20 bugs gets that filled then it is still a 
big leap forward.

Or... Ask for a dev whose whole job is to fill out those forms. I'm sure 
there are plenty of non-coders out there who would be willing to do it, 
even a team!

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Mark Loeser]

Ioannis Aslanidis <aslanidis@gmail.com> said:
> Hello,

>  [... whole bunch of ideas ...]

> Let me hear of what you have to say to all this.

Has anyone looked at how others projects do bugdays?  We shouldn't need
to reinvent the wheel here and can probably get some great ideas from
other distributions out there.

-- 
Mark Loeser
email         -   halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
email         -   mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web           -   http://www.halcy0n.com

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

On 03/01/10 22:17, Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
> getting control of bugday.gentoo.org and be able to upload our own
> content would be great.

The current page is said to generate one XML request per bug listed on
the page for each request.  From my experience trying to remove bugs
from that page yesterday(?) (through clicking on "remove" buttons) I
have the impression that it's true: Du to page reload times the site in
it's current form is unusable in the very sense of the word.

Ideas I have on a rather simple rewrite:

 - Split the bugday website into two pages:
   - Page "Open bugs" showing
     - open bugday-keyworded bugs (with date of the latest bugday)
       in randomized order
   - Page "Closed bugs" showing
     - closed bugday-keyworded bugs (with date of the latest bugday)
       in some sorted order
     - a ranking with closed bugs per participant
       (as that may not be the assignee such information could
       maybe be encoding into the status whiteboard, somewhere
       we can query it from easily if whiteboard fits for that)

 - Do one search request to bugzilla internally, only.
   Should be possible as we're now asking bugzilla for the list
   of bugs instead of asking for details on a list we pass in.

 - Simple caching of bugzilla requests for 10 seconds or so.
   Should not hurt the bugday experience much and reduce load
   further.

I could imagine that an ugly prototype with rough-edges of that could
take two days in plain Python.  At the moment I cannot say when and if I
have these two days, but maybe someone else with time is fire and flame
for it by now?



Sebastian

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Alec Warner]

On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 03/01/10 22:17, Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
>> getting control of bugday.gentoo.org and be able to upload our own
>> content would be great.
>
> The current page is said to generate one XML request per bug listed on
> the page for each request.  From my experience trying to remove bugs
> from that page yesterday(?) (through clicking on "remove" buttons) I
> have the impression that it's true: Du to page reload times the site in
> it's current form is unusable in the very sense of the word.
>
> Ideas I have on a rather simple rewrite:
>
>  - Split the bugday website into two pages:
>   - Page "Open bugs" showing
>     - open bugday-keyworded bugs (with date of the latest bugday)
>       in randomized order
>   - Page "Closed bugs" showing
>     - closed bugday-keyworded bugs (with date of the latest bugday)
>       in some sorted order
>     - a ranking with closed bugs per participant
>       (as that may not be the assignee such information could
>       maybe be encoding into the status whiteboard, somewhere
>       we can query it from easily if whiteboard fits for that)
>
>  - Do one search request to bugzilla internally, only.
>   Should be possible as we're now asking bugzilla for the list
>   of bugs instead of asking for details on a list we pass in.
>
>  - Simple caching of bugzilla requests for 10 seconds or so.
>   Should not hurt the bugday experience much and reduce load
>   further.

I would recommend not hardcoding 10 seconds; but otherwise caching is good ;)

>
> I could imagine that an ugly prototype with rough-edges of that could
> take two days in plain Python.  At the moment I cannot say when and if I
> have these two days, but maybe someone else with time is fire and flame
> for it by now?
>
>
>
> Sebastian
>
>

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

On 03/02/10 21:47, Alec Warner wrote:
> I would recommend not hardcoding 10 seconds; but otherwise caching is good ;)

What do you propose?



Sebastian

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Alec Warner]

I propose a value that you can set at runtime.  We do this at work
with the gflags package (already in the tree) or a config file.

-A

On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 03/02/10 21:47, Alec Warner wrote:
>> I would recommend not hardcoding 10 seconds; but otherwise caching is good ;)
>
> What do you propose?
>
>
>
> Sebastian
>
>

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Ioannis Aslanidis]

When am I getting control over that? Can infra help me?

On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 03/01/10 22:17, Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
>> getting control of bugday.gentoo.org and be able to upload our own
>> content would be great.
>
> The current page is said to generate one XML request per bug listed on
> the page for each request.  From my experience trying to remove bugs
> from that page yesterday(?) (through clicking on "remove" buttons) I
> have the impression that it's true: Du to page reload times the site in
> it's current form is unusable in the very sense of the word.
>
> Ideas I have on a rather simple rewrite:
>
>  - Split the bugday website into two pages:
>   - Page "Open bugs" showing
>     - open bugday-keyworded bugs (with date of the latest bugday)
>       in randomized order
>   - Page "Closed bugs" showing
>     - closed bugday-keyworded bugs (with date of the latest bugday)
>       in some sorted order
>     - a ranking with closed bugs per participant
>       (as that may not be the assignee such information could
>       maybe be encoding into the status whiteboard, somewhere
>       we can query it from easily if whiteboard fits for that)
>
>  - Do one search request to bugzilla internally, only.
>   Should be possible as we're now asking bugzilla for the list
>   of bugs instead of asking for details on a list we pass in.
>
>  - Simple caching of bugzilla requests for 10 seconds or so.
>   Should not hurt the bugday experience much and reduce load
>   further.
>
> I could imagine that an ugly prototype with rough-edges of that could
> take two days in plain Python.  At the moment I cannot say when and if I
> have these two days, but maybe someone else with time is fire and flame
> for it by now?
>
>
>
> Sebastian
>
>



-- 
Ioannis Aslanidis
http://www.deathwing00.org
<deathwing00[at]gentoo.org> 0x47F370A0

Re: [gentoo-dev] Marking bugs for bugday?

[Roy Bamford]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1241 bytes --]

On 2010.03.01 21:17, Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
> Hello,
> 
[snip]

> Bug Day, followed by an announcement the week before and a reminder
> the day before. This needs to happen in publicly visible places (and
> has happened in some of them as far as I recall): forums, gentoo-
> user,
> gentoo-dev, gentoo-announce, gentoo-dev-announce, the newsletter
> (dead?) and the website. Having people related to the Bug Day project
> posting to their blogs can help a lot in this case as well.
[snip
 
> Regards.
> 
> 
[snip]
> 
> 
> -- 
> Ioannis Aslanidis
> http://www.deathwing00.org
> <deathwing00[at]gentoo.org> 0x47F370A0
> 

I used to do the announces, sometimes under the psudonym of Welps PA. 
I can chip in again and with some of the organisation and the 
announces.

Its definately worth saving bugday - it brings devs and users closer 
together.

sping was looking at "two days in plain Python"  - do we need a 
developer to do that or could that be one of the bugs for bugday ?
I realise that gentoo.org will host it, so we need to validate it but 
that should be much less time than writing the code.
 
--  
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(Neddyseagoon) an member of
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
trustees


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]