On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Kent Fredric <kentfred...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 6 February 2016 at 07:19, Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> 'd be all for automated bug assignment. Usually when this comes up a >> bunch of hero bug wranglers step up and say it isn't needed, because >> we have hero bug wranglers. As long as people keep stepping up to do >> that I'm not going to tell them that they can't. However, if the bug >> queue ever does go out of control I'd be all for just auto-assigning >> them. If they rarely get assigned to the wrong people, then they can >> just reassign them. And nothing stops us from having a bugzilla query >> for "new bugs filed in last 24h" for people who want to take a quick >> look at recent bugs for trends or to help clean them up across >> projects. > > > Hm, or alternatively, you could have a scheme where things defaulted > in the bug queue, and were auto-assigned where possible after no > feedback for a time, or maybe it would be defaulted only when the > queue is over a certain size. >
That was my thought around having a query for bugs filed in the last 24h. Basically they'd be auto-assigned, but people could choose to review recent bugs to see if any were mis-assigned, and no action is necessary if they're OK. The main problem I see with auto-assignment is that some asignees end up being black holes for bugs. If two active devs get their bugs crossed it isn't a big deal since they'll just reassign them to each other. If an active dev gets their bug assigned to an inactive dev, they might never hear about it. -- Rich
