[gentoo-dev] Keyword request interface (SoC candidate?)

[gentoo-dev] Keyword request interface (SoC candidate?)

[Santiago M. Mola]

I splitted this from the SoC thread so the possible discussion doesn't
add noise to the original thread.

On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 7:32 PM, joshua jackson <tsunam@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
>  Google is once again doing the summer of code for students. I'm helping
>  organize it this year and am putting out a call for some elements to help.
>
>  1) We need idea's for things to do. Diego has already submitted some via
>  his blog which have been taken into consideration.

A lot of users don't feel comfortable using Bugzilla and often are
lost with our procedures for keyword (both ~ and stable) requests. I
think we could use an easy web interface for requesting specific
keywords for packages in a point-and-click fashion.

So the user would just pick a package from the list, and check some
boxes with the arch(es) she want to see in ~arch or stable. Then ATs
could go for the ones that met the requirements, and even prioritize
stabilisations depending on the number of users who have requested it.

I've been talking about it with some users and everyone agrees that
they would like to have such an interface...

What do you think about? Would it be easy to integrate it with
packages.g.o or should it belong somewhere else? Do you think this is
a suitable project for SoC?

Regards,
Santiago

-- 
Santiago M. Mola
Jabber ID: cooldwind@gmail.com
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Keyword request interface (SoC candidate?)

[Torsten Rehn]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 879 bytes --]

On Thursday 28 February 2008, Santiago M. Mola wrote:
> A lot of users don't feel comfortable using Bugzilla and often are
> lost with our procedures for keyword (both ~ and stable) requests. I
> think we could use an easy web interface for requesting specific
> keywords for packages in a point-and-click fashion.

I have been working on something like this and would like to continue doing so 
for SoC (see [1]). However, it is a fairly large project and I would 
appreciate some input on what specific goals to target for SoC.
Also, I anticipate some resistance, so I'd suggest seeing that project as a 
long term experiment starting with SoC, that may eventually produce something 
that satisfies most of the developer staff.

[1] http://scel.info/blog/posts/google-soc-proposal/

-- 
Torsten Rehn <scel@xdap.org>
Gentoo AMD64 Arch Tester
http://scel.info

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Keyword request interface (SoC candidate?)

[Alec Warner]

cvs.gentoo.org:/var/cvsroot/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/userrel/index2008.xml

Add it ;)

On 2/28/08, Santiago M. Mola <coldwind@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I splitted this from the SoC thread so the possible discussion doesn't
>  add noise to the original thread.
>
>  On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 7:32 PM, joshua jackson <tsunam@gentoo.org> wrote:
>  >
>  >  Google is once again doing the summer of code for students. I'm helping
>  >  organize it this year and am putting out a call for some elements to help.
>  >
>  >  1) We need idea's for things to do. Diego has already submitted some via
>  >  his blog which have been taken into consideration.
>
>  A lot of users don't feel comfortable using Bugzilla and often are
>  lost with our procedures for keyword (both ~ and stable) requests. I
>  think we could use an easy web interface for requesting specific
>  keywords for packages in a point-and-click fashion.
>
>  So the user would just pick a package from the list, and check some
>  boxes with the arch(es) she want to see in ~arch or stable. Then ATs
>  could go for the ones that met the requirements, and even prioritize
>  stabilisations depending on the number of users who have requested it.
>
>  I've been talking about it with some users and everyone agrees that
>  they would like to have such an interface...
>
>  What do you think about? Would it be easy to integrate it with
>  packages.g.o or should it belong somewhere else? Do you think this is
>  a suitable project for SoC?
>
>  Regards,
>  Santiago
>
>  --
>  Santiago M. Mola
>  Jabber ID: cooldwind@gmail.com
>
> --
>  gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Keyword request interface (SoC candidate?)

[Santiago M. Mola]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:43 PM, Alec Warner <antarus@gentoo.org> wrote:
> cvs.gentoo.org:/var/cvsroot/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/userrel/index2008.xml
>
>  Add it ;)
>

I'm not 100% sure this is a good idea, that's why I'm asking for
opinions here ;-)

Also, I doubt I can mentor.

-- 
Santiago M. Mola
Jabber ID: cooldwind@gmail.com
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Keyword request interface (SoC candidate?)

[Richard Freeman]

Santiago M. Mola wrote:
> 
> I've been talking about it with some users and everyone agrees that
> they would like to have such an interface...
> 
> What do you think about? Would it be easy to integrate it with
> packages.g.o or should it belong somewhere else? Do you think this is
> a suitable project for SoC?

I like the idea, although it is a bit redundant with bugzilla.  One 
thing that would be nice is better workflow management.  Right now it 
would be nice as an arch dev to be able to get a list of all stable 
requests that have been checked by an arch tester on my arch - that 
isn't simple now.  We used to keyword bugs STABLE or TESTED but I don't 
think that anybody is doing that any more - and it breaks down when you 
have 7 archs CC'ed on a bug anyway (which one is tested?).

The fundamental issue, though, is that keywording obscure packages is 
not trivial.  I cringe when I see a stable request for some dialup 
networking package - I doubt many devs even own modems these days.

A tool like the one proposed could even raise questions about how more 
obscure packages should be maintained.  Maybe all interested users could 
subscribe to a package and then vote on when they will go stable.  If 
66% of users interested in a package vote that a package is stable then 
a dev would have discretion to just keyword it without any testing at 
all (obviously this would not be done with critical packages, but the 
world isn't going to end if autopano-sift breaks down on some edge 
case).  It also gets users more involved in the QA process and is a 
little less "cathedral" like...
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Keyword request interface (SoC candidate?)

[Peter Volkov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1004 bytes --]


В Чтв, 28/02/2008 в 21:49 -0500, Richard Freeman пишет:
> Santiago M. Mola wrote:
> > What do you think about? Would it be easy to integrate it with
> > packages.g.o or should it belong somewhere else? Do you think this is
> > a suitable project for SoC?
> 
> I like the idea, although it is a bit redundant with bugzilla.

Exactly. It's not convenient when we have stabilization requests in one
place and problems with packages to be stabilized (or even stable on
some archs) reported in another...

Stealing ideas from the recent discussion of KISS in -security ml[1]:
May be it's better to have such keyword application as an interface to
bugzilla. This separate web/cli/gui program will add/update/search bugs
in bugzilla and e.g. Status Whiteboard field could be used to track
status of the bugs... Also such implementation would move forward KISS
project too.


[1] http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-security/msg_684b5c1fe2970c2d4be05ba42e9ff4e8.xml

-- 
Peter.

[-- Attachment #2: Эта часть сообщения подписана цифровой подписью --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Keyword request interface (SoC candidate?)

[Rémi Cardona]

Peter Volkov a écrit :
> В Чтв, 28/02/2008 в 21:49 -0500, Richard Freeman пишет:
>> Santiago M. Mola wrote:
>>> What do you think about? Would it be easy to integrate it with
>>> packages.g.o or should it belong somewhere else? Do you think this is
>>> a suitable project for SoC?
>> I like the idea, although it is a bit redundant with bugzilla.
> 
> Exactly. It's not convenient when we have stabilization requests in one
> place and problems with packages to be stabilized (or even stable on
> some archs) reported in another...
> 
> Stealing ideas from the recent discussion of KISS in -security ml[1]:
> May be it's better to have such keyword application as an interface to
> bugzilla. This separate web/cli/gui program will add/update/search bugs
> in bugzilla and e.g. Status Whiteboard field could be used to track
> status of the bugs... Also such implementation would move forward KISS
> project too.

+1 on that idea, using bugzilla with an external tool for keyword 
requests is a good idea.

The tool could do bugzilla research to see if the keyword has already 
been requested and point the user to the corresponding bug report, 
hopefully limiting the number of dupes.

Cheers,

Rémi
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Keyword request interface (SoC candidate?)

[Richard Freeman]

Rémi Cardona wrote:
> 
> +1 on that idea, using bugzilla with an external tool for keyword 
> requests is a good idea.
> 
> The tool could do bugzilla research to see if the keyword has already 
> been requested and point the user to the corresponding bug report, 
> hopefully limiting the number of dupes.
> 

++

It would still be nice to have better status tracking in bugzilla - some 
way for ATs to officially mark that stuff is tested in a way that can be 
easily queried (so that ATs can find stuff that isn't tested, and devs 
can find stuff that has been).  The issue about hard-to-test packages is 
really a separate one, but one that could use a solution...
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Keyword request interface (SoC candidate?)

[Thomas Anderson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1079 bytes --]

On Friday 29 February 2008 13:13:16 Richard Freeman wrote:
> Rémi Cardona wrote:
> > +1 on that idea, using bugzilla with an external tool for keyword
> > requests is a good idea.
> >
> > The tool could do bugzilla research to see if the keyword has already
> > been requested and point the user to the corresponding bug report,
> > hopefully limiting the number of dupes.
>
> ++
>
> It would still be nice to have better status tracking in bugzilla - some
> way for ATs to officially mark that stuff is tested in a way that can be
> easily queried (so that ATs can find stuff that isn't tested, and devs
> can find stuff that has been).  The issue about hard-to-test packages is
> really a separate one, but one that could use a solution...

Definitely. I find it very annoying searching through bugzilla looking for 
things that other Arch Testers haven't tested. On the other hand, after a 
while you start to remember which bugs haven't been tested(at least if you 
are on an arch with >150 bugs). Barring that case, such a system would be 
very nice.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Keyword request interface (SoC candidate?)

[Aaron Mavrinac]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8, Size: 1627 bytes --]

On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 1:13 PM, Richard Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Rémi Cardona wrote:
> >
> > +1 on that idea, using bugzilla with an external tool for keyword
> > requests is a good idea.
> >
> > The tool could do bugzilla research to see if the keyword has already
> > been requested and point the user to the corresponding bug report,
> > hopefully limiting the number of dupes.

Definite ++ here..

> It would still be nice to have better status tracking in bugzilla - some
> way for ATs to officially mark that stuff is tested in a way that can be
> easily queried (so that ATs can find stuff that isn't tested, and devs
> can find stuff that has been).  The issue about hard-to-test packages is
> really a separate one, but one that could use a solution...

This would certainly help coordinate AT efforts. Couldn't this also be
done by searching through bugzilla? Maybe with an "official" keyword,
or some sort of flag we don't otherwise use? (I'm not intensely
familiar with bugzilla internals.) Keeping it all in bugzilla seems
best, if possible.

An additional suggestion: what about some way for ATs to indicate that
they are currently testing a package? Testing can take a while, and
occasionally I've tested packages only to find that someone else had
already taken care of it. Coordinating that on bugzilla or the mailing
list as is would be cumbersome, and IRC is hit or miss. Not sure how
this could be implemented, but that's what a SoCer is for (hey, maybe
me, I'm planning to apply!).

-- 
Aaron Mavrinac
www.mavrinac.com

PGP Public Key: http://www.mavrinac.com/pgp.asc
éí¢‡^¾X¬¶È\x1ežÚ(¢¸&j)bž	b²

Re: [gentoo-dev] Keyword request interface (SoC candidate?)

[Bernd Steinhauser]

Santiago M. Mola schrieb:
> I splitted this from the SoC thread so the possible discussion doesn't
> add noise to the original thread.
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 7:32 PM, joshua jackson <tsunam@gentoo.org> wrote:
>   
>>  Google is once again doing the summer of code for students. I'm helping
>>  organize it this year and am putting out a call for some elements to help.
>>
>>  1) We need idea's for things to do. Diego has already submitted some via
>>  his blog which have been taken into consideration.
>>     
>
> A lot of users don't feel comfortable using Bugzilla and often are
> lost with our procedures for keyword (both ~ and stable) requests. I
> think we could use an easy web interface for requesting specific
> keywords for packages in a point-and-click fashion.
>
> So the user would just pick a package from the list, and check some
> boxes with the arch(es) she want to see in ~arch or stable. Then ATs
> could go for the ones that met the requirements, and even prioritize
> stabilisations depending on the number of users who have requested it.
>
> I've been talking about it with some users and everyone agrees that
> they would like to have such an interface...
>
> What do you think about? Would it be easy to integrate it with
> packages.g.o or should it belong somewhere else? Do you think this is
> a suitable project for SoC?
>
> Regards,
> Santiago
>
>   
Maybe you are looking for something similar to the Wine app database?
http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=3755

Of course not the same, but similar.
I do think, that something like this could integrate in a very nice way
into packages.gentoo.org. The nice thing about that would also be, that
you have a nice overview over the packages(versions), that have a keyword.

Bernd
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[OT] Re: [gentoo-dev] Keyword request interface (SoC candidate?)

[Andrej Kacian]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 386 bytes --]

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:49:25 -0500
Richard Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:

> I cringe when I see a stable request for some dialup 
> networking package - I doubt many devs even own modems these days.

I do own few modems, but alas, no phone line to hook them up to. :)

-- 
Andrej "Ticho" Kacian <ticho at gentoo dot org>
Gentoo Linux Developer - net-mail, antivirus, x86

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Keyword request interface (SoC candidate?)

[Richard Freeman]

Aaron Mavrinac wrote:
> 
> This would certainly help coordinate AT efforts. Couldn't this also be
> done by searching through bugzilla? Maybe with an "official" keyword,
> or some sort of flag we don't otherwise use? (I'm not intensely
> familiar with bugzilla internals.) Keeping it all in bugzilla seems
> best, if possible.


I know that the amd64 team used to use the "STABLE" and "TESTED" 
keywords to indicate that an AT felt it was ok to keyword stable or 
~arch respectively.  I guess that practice went away.  It doesn't work 
so well on bugs with 5 archs CC'ed though.  Maybe we need STABLEAMD64, 
STABLEX86, etc.

As an AT I used to run queries all the time looking for bugs that 
weren't keyworded STABLE/TESTED and which otherwise looked like they 
needed AT attention.  I still check the corresponding developer query 
for stuff keyworded STABLE/TESTED with amd64 CC'ed...

There are definitely some easy ways to improve things that don't require 
code changes...
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Keyword request interface (SoC candidate?)

[Aaron Mavrinac]

On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 6:26 PM, Richard Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
>  I know that the amd64 team used to use the "STABLE" and "TESTED"
>  keywords to indicate that an AT felt it was ok to keyword stable or
>  ~arch respectively.  I guess that practice went away.  It doesn't work
>  so well on bugs with 5 archs CC'ed though.  Maybe we need STABLEAMD64,
>  STABLEX86, etc.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm talking about. When I open a
stable/tested bug specifically for sparc, I use those keywords, but
like you said, that doesn't apply when the request hits multiple
archs.

>  As an AT I used to run queries all the time looking for bugs that
>  weren't keyworded STABLE/TESTED and which otherwise looked like they
>  needed AT attention.  I still check the corresponding developer query
>  for stuff keyworded STABLE/TESTED with amd64 CC'ed...
>
>  There are definitely some easy ways to improve things that don't require
>  code changes...

Some sort of front-end web app could be useful for the following:

1. Properly and consistently format user stable requests and AT/dev
responses for storage in bugzilla (and avoid dupes).
2. Provide pre-fabricated bugzilla queries (and relevant formatted
output) for common related AT/dev tasks.
3. Interface with packages.gentoo.org.
4. Provide at-your-fingertips cvs info, rdep info, open bugs, stable
requests for previous versions, gatt info, etc.

-- 
Aaron Mavrinac
www.mavrinac.com

PGP Public Key: http://www.mavrinac.com/pgp.asc
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: Keyword request interface (SoC candidate?)

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2408 bytes --]

Santiago M. Mola wrote:
> A lot of users don't feel comfortable using Bugzilla and often are
> lost with our procedures for keyword (both ~ and stable) requests. I
> think we could use an easy web interface for requesting specific
> keywords for packages in a point-and-click fashion.

Speaking about Bugzilla in general, I think ours could really use a facelift. 
When you look at what some other projects have done to make their bug reporting 
and tracking interface more user-friendly, it's obvious we have a lot of room 
for improvement.  I remember back when I first started using Gentoo seeing a 
mock-up some dev had done for a bugzilla redesign that was much simpler and 
visually appealing, but I can't remember who and I suppose they've probably 
retired since.  I've always thought it was a shame it never saw implementation. 
  Anyways, I think this could make a good project for someone in our community 
who would like to participate but perhaps is more artistic than technical. 
Previous web design work and a good understanding of user interface design would 
be required of course.  I suppose we should probably ask infra if this is 
possible first too. ;)

On keywording/stabilizing, Bugzilla has a flags feature that might be used to 
track what has been tested where.  For example:

   https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12345

Flags have three states: +, -, and ?.  + and - are obvious, and ? is a request. 
  So imagine having a "x86 tested" flag that the maintainer sets to "?" to 
request stabilization of their package.  An email is sent to the arch alias 
notifying them of the request.  The arch tester tests it out and sets the flag 
to + or - depending on their results.  The arch dev stabilizes the package as 
normal.

If we added a "Keyword/Stable Request" component to the "Gentoo Linux" product 
we could also have it dependent on that, so only bugs in that component would 
display the flags.  We can also make it so only people with editbugs privileges 
and request or set flags.

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

Again, this would require infra to be on board.


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


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]