[gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Tomáš Chvátal]

Hi,

I added the bug queries to http://qa-reports.gentoo.org/ based by year of last 
being touched.

Take look, try to close the oldest ones/invalid ones and so on.

I think it is lame we have bugs last touched in 2k5 :-P

Cheers

Tom

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Markos Chandras]

On 14 February 2013 18:19, Tomáš Chvátal <tomas.chvatal@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I added the bug queries to http://qa-reports.gentoo.org/ based by year of last
> being touched.
>
> Take look, try to close the oldest ones/invalid ones and so on.
>
> I think it is lame we have bugs last touched in 2k5 :-P
>
> Cheers
>
> Tom
>

Why not 2011 and 2012 as well?

-- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer
http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Tomáš Chvátal]

Dne Čt 14. února 2013 18:34:10, Markos Chandras napsal(a):
> 
> Why not 2011 and 2012 as well?

Feel free to add more, its on qa-scripts git repository.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Markos Chandras]

On 14 February 2013 19:26, Tomáš Chvátal <tomas.chvatal@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dne Čt 14. února 2013 18:34:10, Markos Chandras napsal(a):
>>
>> Why not 2011 and 2012 as well?
>
> Feel free to add more, its on qa-scripts git repository.
>

Ok I was just wondering if there was a reason you did not add them
along with the others.

-- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer
http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Tomáš Chvátal]

2013/2/15 Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org>:
> On 14 February 2013 19:26, Tomáš Chvátal <tomas.chvatal@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dne Čt 14. února 2013 18:34:10, Markos Chandras napsal(a):
>>>
>>> Why not 2011 and 2012 as well?
>>
>> Feel free to add more, its on qa-scripts git repository.
>>
>
> Ok I was just wondering if there was a reason you did not add them
> along with the others.
>
I was just too lazy and i was only curious for the long open bugs :P

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Agostino Sarubbo]

On Thursday 14 February 2013 19:19:52 Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> I added the bug queries to http://qa-reports.gentoo.org/ based by year of
> last  being touched.
> 
> Take look, try to close the oldest ones/invalid ones and so on.
> 
> I think it is lame we have bugs last touched in 2k5

Probably we don't need to see maintainer-wanted stuff..
-- 
Agostino Sarubbo / ago -at- gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux Developer

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Tomáš Chvátal]

2013/2/14 Agostino Sarubbo <ago@gentoo.org>:
> Probably we don't need to see maintainer-wanted stuff..

Oh but we need to see them, quite few of those can be closed as
invalid because the upstream is long ago dead.

Tom

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Alec Warner]

On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 1:41 AM, Tomáš Chvátal <tomas.chvatal@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/2/14 Agostino Sarubbo <ago@gentoo.org>:
>> Probably we don't need to see maintainer-wanted stuff..
>
> Oh but we need to see them, quite few of those can be closed as
> invalid because the upstream is long ago dead.
>
> Tom
>

I was under the impression we just left those bugs open forever...are
we closing them now?

-A

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Tomáš Chvátal]

2013/2/15 Alec Warner <antarus@gentoo.org>:
>
> I was under the impression we just left those bugs open forever...are
> we closing them now?
>
Why should we keep them opened forever. They should be closed when the
package is no longer provided anywhere or obsoleted by something else.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Gilles Dartiguelongue]

Le jeudi 14 février 2013 à 19:19 +0100, Tomáš Chvátal a écrit :
> Hi,
> 
> I added the bug queries to http://qa-reports.gentoo.org/ based by year of last 
> being touched.
> 
> Take look, try to close the oldest ones/invalid ones and so on.
> 
> I think it is lame we have bugs last touched in 2k5 :-P

This is nice.

On another note, I just saw a report for EAPI per eclass which is super
nice but unfortunately, EAPI=5 is listed but actually unsupported by the
result of the scan :)


-- 
Gilles Dartiguelongue <eva@gentoo.org>
Gentoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Tomáš Chvátal]

2013/2/15 Gilles Dartiguelongue <eva@gentoo.org>:
> On another note, I just saw a report for EAPI per eclass which is super
> nice but unfortunately, EAPI=5 is listed but actually unsupported by the
> result of the scan :)
>
This can't be done better right now, as we use pkgcore to gather these
stats and it is still not supporting eapi5. At the point it gets
interpreted by pkgcore it will sort itself out.

Tom

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Dirkjan Ochtman]

On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Tomáš Chvátal <tomas.chvatal@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think it is lame we have bugs last touched in 2k5 :-P

Yeah, very useful. I went through most of the Python bugs and cleaned some up.

It looks like there's a *lot* of maintainer-wanted bugs that are very
old. I wonder if we can script cleaning those up; check how many CC
addresses, see if the upstream HOMEPAGE is still up, that kind of
things.

Cheers,

Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Pacho Ramos]

El jue, 14-02-2013 a las 19:19 +0100, Tomáš Chvátal escribió:
> Hi,
> 
> I added the bug queries to http://qa-reports.gentoo.org/ based by year of last 
> being touched.
> 
> Take look, try to close the oldest ones/invalid ones and so on.
> 
> I think it is lame we have bugs last touched in 2k5 :-P
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Tom
> 
> 

Could "maintainer-wanted" assigned bugs be filtered? Otherwise we see a
ton of that kind of bugs that, I think, we already know can become
really old ;)

Thanks!

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Tomáš Chvátal]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 499 bytes --]

2013/6/21 Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org>

> Could "maintainer-wanted" assigned bugs be filtered? Otherwise we see a
> ton of that kind of bugs that, I think, we already know can become
> really old ;)
>
> Thanks!
>
> You can do such yourself. Just clone the repo [1] and commit the updated
links.

Also my plan was to list even m-w bugs, because even those suckers get
obsoleted often so we should close them.

Cheers

Tom

[1] http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/qa-scripts.git;a=summary

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1119 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Markos Chandras]

On 21 June 2013 12:44, Tomáš Chvátal <tomas.chvatal@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/6/21 Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org>
>>
>> Could "maintainer-wanted" assigned bugs be filtered? Otherwise we see a
>> ton of that kind of bugs that, I think, we already know can become
>> really old ;)
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
> You can do such yourself. Just clone the repo [1] and commit the updated
> links.
>
> Also my plan was to list even m-w bugs, because even those suckers get
> obsoleted often so we should close them.
>
> Cheers
>
> Tom
>
> [1] http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/qa-scripts.git;a=summary

That is true. There is nothing special about there m-w bugs. They are
still unresolved bugs, for many years. No need to treat
them differently.

--
Regards,
Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer
http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Andreas K. Huettel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1295 bytes --]

Am Freitag, 21. Juni 2013, 14:50:29 schrieb Markos Chandras:
> On 21 June 2013 12:44, Tomáš Chvátal <tomas.chvatal@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2013/6/21 Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org>
> > 
> >> Could "maintainer-wanted" assigned bugs be filtered? Otherwise we see a
> >> ton of that kind of bugs that, I think, we already know can become
> >> really old ;)
> >> 
> >> Thanks!
> > 
> > You can do such yourself. Just clone the repo [1] and commit the updated
> > links.
> > 
> > Also my plan was to list even m-w bugs, because even those suckers get
> > obsoleted often so we should close them.
> > 
> > Cheers
> > 
> > Tom
> > 
> > [1]
> > http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/qa-scripts.git;a=summary
> 
> That is true. There is nothing special about there m-w bugs. They are
> still unresolved bugs, for many years. No need to treat
> them differently.
> 

How can a m-w bug be resolved? Adding the package is unlikely to happen if 
last request came years ago.

My suggestion would be (this is how I handled it in printing):

1) leave message on bug 
"Is anyone still interested in this?"

2) if noone replies in 2 months, resolve as obsolete


-- 

Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer 
dilfridge@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 966 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 767 bytes --]

Dnia 2013-06-21, o godz. 21:08:45
"Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@gentoo.org> napisał(a):

> Am Freitag, 21. Juni 2013, 14:50:29 schrieb Markos Chandras:
> > That is true. There is nothing special about there m-w bugs. They are
> > still unresolved bugs, for many years. No need to treat
> > them differently.
> 
> How can a m-w bug be resolved? Adding the package is unlikely to happen if 
> last request came years ago.
> 
> My suggestion would be (this is how I handled it in printing):
> 
> 1) leave message on bug 
> "Is anyone still interested in this?"

Er, unless you're going to do something about the bug, please don't
do that. Otherwise, it's like pinging someone and then telling 'ok,
nevermind.'

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 966 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Sergey Popov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1727 bytes --]

21.06.2013 23:08, Andreas K. Huettel пишет:
> Am Freitag, 21. Juni 2013, 14:50:29 schrieb Markos Chandras:
>> On 21 June 2013 12:44, Tomáš Chvátal <tomas.chvatal@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2013/6/21 Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org>
>>>
>>>> Could "maintainer-wanted" assigned bugs be filtered? Otherwise we see a
>>>> ton of that kind of bugs that, I think, we already know can become
>>>> really old ;)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> You can do such yourself. Just clone the repo [1] and commit the updated
>>> links.
>>>
>>> Also my plan was to list even m-w bugs, because even those suckers get
>>> obsoleted often so we should close them.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/qa-scripts.git;a=summary
>>
>> That is true. There is nothing special about there m-w bugs. They are
>> still unresolved bugs, for many years. No need to treat
>> them differently.
>>
> 
> How can a m-w bug be resolved? Adding the package is unlikely to happen if 
> last request came years ago.
> 
> My suggestion would be (this is how I handled it in printing):
> 
> 1) leave message on bug 
> "Is anyone still interested in this?"
> 
> 2) if noone replies in 2 months, resolve as obsolete
> 
> 
IMO maintainer-wanted@ bugs can be resolved only in two ways:

1) package accepted into main tree, bug is closed as FIXED. If package
sits in sunrise - it's not a solution and bug should not be closed;
2) package has dead upstream, does not build with current
gcc/glibc/binutils/whatever and can not be fixed - bug is closed as
OBSOLETE.

-- 
Best regards, Sergey Popov
Gentoo developer
Gentoo Desktop-effects project lead
Gentoo Qt project lead


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 555 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Sergey Popov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 485 bytes --]

21.06.2013 23:22, Sergey Popov пишет:
> 2) package has dead upstream, does not build with current
> gcc/glibc/binutils/whatever and can not be fixed - bug is closed as
> OBSOLETE.
> 

Of course i am talking about long-standing bugs, that assigned to
maintainer-wanted@. That's why OBSOLETE seems to be a better decision,
but WONTFIX is reasonable too :-)

-- 
Best regards, Sergey Popov
Gentoo developer
Gentoo Desktop-effects project lead
Gentoo Qt project lead


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 555 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Alex Xu]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 484 bytes --]

On 21/06/13 03:27 PM, Sergey Popov wrote:
> 21.06.2013 23:22, Sergey Popov пишет:
>> 2) package has dead upstream, does not build with current
>> gcc/glibc/binutils/whatever and can not be fixed - bug is closed as
>> OBSOLETE.
>>
> 
> Of course i am talking about long-standing bugs, that assigned to
> maintainer-wanted@. That's why OBSOLETE seems to be a better decision,
> but WONTFIX is reasonable too :-)
> 
nobody needs it: OBSOLETE
it doesn't work: CANTFIX


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

[Ian Stakenvicius]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 21/06/13 03:53 PM, Alex Xu wrote:
> On 21/06/13 03:27 PM, Sergey Popov wrote:
>> 21.06.2013 23:22, Sergey Popov пишет:
>>> 2) package has dead upstream, does not build with current 
>>> gcc/glibc/binutils/whatever and can not be fixed - bug is
>>> closed as OBSOLETE.
>>> 
>> 
>> Of course i am talking about long-standing bugs, that assigned
>> to maintainer-wanted@. That's why OBSOLETE seems to be a better
>> decision, but WONTFIX is reasonable too :-)
>> 
> nobody needs it: OBSOLETE it doesn't work: CANTFIX
> 

For many m-w bugs, its existence in overlays like sunrise still apply
here to whether or not the bug should be left active and valid, tho.
I think it might still be beneficial to filter out the m-w bugs that
are tagged with InOverlay -- or at least, not expect them to be
resolved or closed unless the sunrise dev's take care of this when
they drop the package.




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlHIYa4ACgkQ2ugaI38ACPADuQD/RSPQY3rmzp9tjVURHZFNgsut
04MIae+7g/S9AcG64e8BAKmqmIBHeJv0+qDDfs5gZA9xoEJBiRmxDaFrdLnmBDZS
=Yyyi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[gentoo-dev] Re: Last time touched bugs by year

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 931 bytes --]

On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 21:08:45 +0200
"Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Am Freitag, 21. Juni 2013, 14:50:29 schrieb Markos Chandras:

> > That is true. There is nothing special about there m-w bugs. They are
> > still unresolved bugs, for many years. No need to treat
> > them differently.

> How can a m-w bug be resolved? Adding the package is unlikely to happen if 
> last request came years ago.
> 
> My suggestion would be (this is how I handled it in printing):
> 
> 1) leave message on bug 
> "Is anyone still interested in this?"
> 
> 2) if noone replies in 2 months, resolve as obsolete

Of course that would knock them off the list. :)

Maybe we could have two lists for each year - one with and one without m-w bugs.


-- 
Ryan Hill                        psn: dirtyepic_sk
   gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org

47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E  7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]