On 08/21/2014 11:02 AM, Armando M. wrote:
> Hi folks,
> According to [1], we have ways to introduce external references to
> commit messages.
> These are useful to mark certain patches and their relevance in the
> context of documentation, upgrades, etc.
> I was wondering if it would be useful considering the addition of
> another tag:
> GateFailureFix
> The objective of this tag, mainly for consumption by the review team,
> would be to make sure that some patches get more attention than others,
> as they affect the velocity of how certain critical issues are addressed
> (and gate failures affect everyone).
> As for machine consumption, I know that some projects use the
> 'gate-failure' tag to categorize LP bugs that affect the gate. The use
> of a GateFailureFix tag in the commit message could make the tagging
> automatic, so that we can keep a log of what all the gate failures are
> over time.
> Not sure if this was proposed before, and I welcome any input on the matter.

A concern with this approach is it's pretty arbitrary, and not always
clear which bugs are being addressed and how severe they are.

An idea that came up in the Infra/QA meetup was to build a custom review
dashboard based on the bug list in elastic recheck. That would also
encourage people to categorize this bugs through that system, and I
think provide a virtuous circle around identifying the issues at hand.

I think Joe Gordon had a first pass at this, but I'd be more interested
in doing it this way because it means the patch author fixing a bug just
needs to know they are fixing the bug. Whether or not it's currently a
gate issue would be decided not by the commit message (static) but by
our system that understands what are the gate issues *right now* (dynamic).


Sean Dague

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

OpenStack-dev mailing list

Reply via email to