I believe that only the reporter, owner, and CCs are notified when an update is made, not anyone who added a comment. Unless a reviewer adds themselves to the CCs when providing feedback or assigns the ticket to themselves (which would be unlikely, when leaving feedback that the reporter needs to take further action), the reviewer won't be notified. But other people who stumble across the ticket might think that since feedback was been provided, and possibly even actioned already by the reporter, that the ticket will be monitored by the reviewer and therefore leave the ticket alone themselves.
The problem is, as you've mentioned, that is is super easy for busy people to skim through a large volume of trac email notifications when the majority are just people adding a comment or adding themselves to the CCs. There's nothing that makes it stand out to indicate who is responsible for the next step, whether the next step is pushing it back to the reporter, closing it, finding someone else to review it, marking it RFC or actually committing it. I think there needs to be more ownership of tickets and a more direct way to make it clear to reporter, reviewer, and any other interested parties, in whose court the ball lies for the next steps to be taken. Similar to the way major features need to be championed by at least one core committer, I'd like to see more of a mentorship type scenario between reporter and reviewer, sort of like remote pair programming, to avoid stagnation. Explicitly, this would involve a commitment from the reporter to action feedback given to them and a commitment from the reviewer to re- visit the ticket once that feedback has been actioned and update its status accordingly. At the moment all these tickets just sit in a pool waiting for the lucky day when some random person will stumble across it and hope that they don't just assume someone else is taking care of it and leave it as is. This doesn't have to be done with new flags on trac, but maybe a change to the contributing guide that tells people that when they review a ticket and provide feedback on it, they can expect the reporter to assign the ticket back to them when the feedback has been actioned making it clear that they should revisit it? I'm not sure if this would trigger an email notification to the new "owner", if they didn't take ownership of the ticket themselves? Cheers. Tai. On Nov 18, 12:17 am, Gabriel Hurley <[email protected]> wrote: > > Maybe trac can be improved in this respect by notifying > > reviewers when tickets that they have closed, or accepted, or provided > > feedback on, are updated. > > In my experience Trac already does that... when a ticket is changed > (by anyone), the reporter, the owner, anyone on the cc list, and > anyone who has changed the ticket (by adding a comment, triaging, > etc.) gets an email. I get quite a few notifications every day from > Django's Trac install. I can only imagine what it's like for the most > active devs. > > The issue which has already been alluded to is that these are > unfiltered streams of information. Getting 30 emails that say someone > added themselves as a CC on this ticket or that ticket makes it less > likely that you'll see the one email where someone reviewed a patch > and marked it as RFC. This is where good Trac queries come in. > > As always, the rest comes down to the real hours we're all willing and > able to put in :-) > > All the best, > > - Gabriel -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
