On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 3:20 AM Ahmet Altay <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I agree with the proposals here. Initial state of "Needs Review" and blocking 
> releases on untriaged issues will ensure that we will at least look at every 
> new issue once.

+1.

I'm more ambivalent about closing stale issues. Unlike PRs, issues can
be filed as "we should (not forget to) do this" much sooner than
they're actively worked on.

> On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 10:30 AM Maximilian Michels <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Kenn,
>>
>> As your data shows, default-assigning issues to a single person does not
>> automatically solve triaging issues. Quite the contrary, it hides the triage
>> status of an issue.
>>
>>  From the perspective of the Flink Runner, we used to auto-assign but we got 
>> rid
>> of this. Instead, we monitor the newly coming issues and take actions. We 
>> also
>> go through the old ones occasionally. I believe that works fine for us.
>>
>> The Flink project itself also does not default-assign, newly created issues 
>> are
>> unassigned. There are component leads overseeing issues. There is no 
>> guarantee
>> that every issue gets triaged.
>>
>> "Needs Triage" or or "Needs Review" (seems easier to understand of non-native
>> speakers) sounds like a good addition, but it will not solve the problem that
>> issues need to be curated and maintained after the initial triage. For 
>> example,
>> I've seen issues not closed after they have been fixed via a PR. However, 
>> "Needs
>> Triage" will ensure that all issues get looked at. This could be helpful for
>> releases, if not-yet-triaged issues are looked at early enough.
>>
>> I'd suggest to:
>>
>> 1) Change new issues to be Unassigned and to be in status "Needs Review"
>> 2) Remove Assignees from all not-being-worked-on issues
>
>
> For the existing issues, I suggest unassign all issues assigned to people 
> with > N issues for a large N. Something like 30, > %1 of all issues. There 
> are also issues assigned to people who are no longer active in the community. 
> We could unassign those as well.
>
> Another issue is average age for open issues is also ever growing and is over 
> > 300 days now. It would be nice if we can have an equivalent of stale bot 
> for PRs for JIRAs, unassigning/closing stale issues periodically.
>
>>
>> 3) Ensure that each component's unresolved issues get looked at regularly
>>
>> I suppose how to do 3) effectively is an open question. I currently don't 
>> see a
>> better way as to oversee each component by multiple committers, similar to 
>> the
>> OWNERS idea that we once had. I think we should move the OWNERS information 
>> to a
>> Wiki page to make ownership/maintainership more transparent and easier to 
>> change.
>
>
> I think this is a good idea. We can also divide components even more and 
> there will be more people looking at smaller components each. We could also 
> consider defining SLO type metrics especially for high priority issues, and 
> present those in a dashboard. That way we can collectively see the overall 
> health of our triaging efforts and prevent important issues from being 
> forgotten.
>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Max
>>
>> On 08.01.19 16:30, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
>> > Forking discussion on
>> >
>> >   - Some folks have 100+ issues assigned
>> >   - Jira components might not be the best way to get things triaged
>> >
>> > I just ran a built-in Jira report to summarize how many tickets are 
>> > claimed by
>> > different users [1]. It does look like component owners tend to accumulate
>> > issues and they are not likely to get addressed.
>> >
>> > So what do we want and how can we make it happen? Here is what I want, 
>> > personally:
>> >
>> >   - every new issue gets looked at by someone who can decide the right
>> > component, who to ping, etc
>> >   - no person is assigned an issue that they are not active on
>> >   - we don't release with potential bugs waiting to be triaged
>> >
>> > The current status it that issues get assigned to a component owner when 
>> > filed.
>> > The component owner should route it and it most likely will end up in some
>> > component unassigned.
>> >
>> > Another possibility is that we add a "Needs Triage" status and figure out 
>> > a way
>> > to make sure they are all looked at - maybe also by blocking a release on 
>> > having
>> > zero Needs Triage bugs. Just an idea.
>> >
>> > And important question I did not look into: what do other Apache or 
>> > Apache-style
>> > decentralized projects do?
>> >
>> > Kenn
>> >
>> > [1]
>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ConfigureReport.jspa?projectOrFilterId=filter-12343976&statistictype=assignees&selectedProjectId=12319527&reportKey=com.atlassian.jira.jira-core-reports-plugin%3Apie-report&atl_token=A5KQ-2QAV-T4JA-FDED%7C4ba437528000034c87065a99ddea7c1ea92342aa%7Clin&Next=Next

Reply via email to