Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On 07/20/2017 06:20 PM, Nematollah Bidokhti wrote: > Hi, > > I have missed the original email on this subject. > We [Fault Genes WG] have been doing some machine learning analysis on Nova > bugs/issues from 3 different sources (Launchpad, Stackoverflow, > ask.openstack.org). We have been able

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

, July 05, 2017 12:24 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 9:52 AM, Sean Dague <s...@dague.net> wrote: > The Nova bug backlog i

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On 2017-07-12 15:50:26 -0500 (-0500), Jay S Bryant wrote: [...] > Looking for the, 'here is what everyone needs to know to start > using StoryBoard' documentation so I can get that linked in our > devref. [...] An excellent point, and as always a bit of a challenge when designing software for use

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On 2017-07-12 14:36:21 -0600 (-0600), Sean Dague wrote: [...] > It would be really nice if we could this as first class support > and not bolt on later, because I fear we're going to get pretty > complicated adhoc schema definitions here that have to be done > client side. It's still not entirely

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On 7/12/2017 3:44 PM, Kendall Nelson wrote: @Jay: I would definitely urge projects to update the places they have any info about bug tracking since different projects use tags differently. I suppose we could add to the SB documentation what the common practices are, but I imagine there will

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

@Jay: I would definitely urge projects to update the places they have any info about bug tracking since different projects use tags differently. I suppose we could add to the SB documentation what the common practices are, but I imagine there will be a lot of project specific details about how the

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On 07/12/2017 02:19 PM, Kendall Nelson wrote: Hey Sean :) So we discussed the issue of tag collisions in the SB meeting we had today. Basically, we came to the conclusion that projects should append their project to the start of the tag, thereby avoiding collision i.e. ironic-compute,

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

Kendall, It looks like our current bug tracking documentation is quite minimal: https://docs.openstack.org/cinder/latest/devref/launchpad.html#bug-tracking Is there going to be a place where SB is going to be documented with some of these details that we can link to under our bug-tracking

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

Hey Sean :) So we discussed the issue of tag collisions in the SB meeting we had today. Basically, we came to the conclusion that projects should append their project to the start of the tag, thereby avoiding collision i.e. ironic-compute, nova-compute, manila-storage, swift-storage,

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On 07/11/2017 04:31 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: On 2017-07-10 07:33:28 -0400 (-0400), Sean Dague wrote: [...] Ideally storyboard would just be a lot more receptive to these kinds of things, by emitting a more native event stream, Well, there is

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On 2017-07-10 07:33:28 -0400 (-0400), Sean Dague wrote: [...] > Ideally storyboard would just be a lot more receptive to these kinds of > things, by emitting a more native event stream, Well, there is

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

Sean Dague writes: > On 07/05/2017 03:23 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > >> >> I also believe that some of the scripts could be transformed into >> native features of Storyboard where bugs could be auto-triaged >> periodically without human intervention. >> Maybe it would convince

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On 07/05/2017 03:23 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > > I also believe that some of the scripts could be transformed into > native features of Storyboard where bugs could be auto-triaged > periodically without human intervention. > Maybe it would convince more OpenStack projects to leave Launchpad and

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On 07/05/2017 03:07 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 7:33 AM, Ben Nemec wrote: >> >> >> On 06/23/2017 11:52 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >>> >>> The Nova bug backlog is just over 800 open bugs, which while >>> historically not terrible, remains too large to be

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 9:52 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > The Nova bug backlog is just over 800 open bugs, which while > historically not terrible, remains too large to be collectively usable > to figure out where things stand. We've had a few recent issues where we > just happened to

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 7:33 AM, Ben Nemec wrote: > > > On 06/23/2017 11:52 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >> >> The Nova bug backlog is just over 800 open bugs, which while >> historically not terrible, remains too large to be collectively usable >> to figure out where things

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 7:33 AM, Ben Nemec wrote: > > > On 06/23/2017 11:52 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >> >> The Nova bug backlog is just over 800 open bugs, which while >> historically not terrible, remains too large to be collectively usable >> to figure out where things

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On 28.06.2017 16:50, Sean Dague wrote: > On 06/28/2017 10:33 AM, Ben Nemec wrote: >> >> >> On 06/23/2017 11:52 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >>> The Nova bug backlog is just over 800 open bugs, which while >>> historically not terrible, remains too large to be collectively usable >>> to figure out where

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On 06/28/2017 10:33 AM, Ben Nemec wrote: > > > On 06/23/2017 11:52 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >> The Nova bug backlog is just over 800 open bugs, which while >> historically not terrible, remains too large to be collectively usable >> to figure out where things stand. We've had a few recent issues

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On 06/23/2017 11:52 AM, Sean Dague wrote: The Nova bug backlog is just over 800 open bugs, which while historically not terrible, remains too large to be collectively usable to figure out where things stand. We've had a few recent issues where we just happened to discover upgrade bugs filed 4

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On 26.06.2017 10:49, Sylvain Bauza wrote: > > > Le 23/06/2017 18:52, Sean Dague a écrit : >> The Nova bug backlog is just over 800 open bugs, which while >> historically not terrible, remains too large to be collectively usable >> to figure out where things stand. We've had a few recent issues

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

On 06/26/2017 04:49 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote: > > > Le 23/06/2017 18:52, Sean Dague a écrit : >> The Nova bug backlog is just over 800 open bugs, which while >> historically not terrible, remains too large to be collectively usable >> to figure out where things stand. We've had a few recent

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

Le 23/06/2017 18:52, Sean Dague a écrit : > The Nova bug backlog is just over 800 open bugs, which while > historically not terrible, remains too large to be collectively usable > to figure out where things stand. We've had a few recent issues where we > just happened to discover upgrade bugs

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

Sean, This sounds amazing and Swift could definitely use some [automated] assistance here. It would help if you could throw out a WIP somewhere. First thought that comes to mind tho storyboard.o.o :\ -Clay On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 9:52 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > The Nova

[openstack-dev] [nova] bug triage experimentation

The Nova bug backlog is just over 800 open bugs, which while historically not terrible, remains too large to be collectively usable to figure out where things stand. We've had a few recent issues where we just happened to discover upgrade bugs filed 4 months ago that needed fixes and backports.