On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Clint Byrum <cl...@fewbar.com> wrote:
> Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2014-11-17 08:46:19 -0800: > > Greetings, > > > > Regardless of how big/small bugs backlog is for each project, I > > believe this is a common, annoying and difficult problem. At the oslo > > meeting today, we're talking about how to address our bug triage > > process and I proposed something that I've seen done in other > > communities (rust-language [0]) that I consider useful and a good > > option for OpenStack too. > > > > The process consist in a bot that sends an email to every *volunteer* > > with 10 bugs to review/triage for the week. Each volunteer follows the > > triage standards, applies tags and provides information on whether the > > bug is still valid or not. The volunteer doesn't have to fix the bug, > > just triage it. > > > > In openstack, we could have a job that does this and then have people > > from each team volunteer to help with triage. The benefits I see are: > > > > * Interested folks don't have to go through the list and filter the > > bugs they want to triage. The bot should be smart enough to pick the > > oldest, most critical, etc. > > > > * It's a totally opt-in process and volunteers can obviously ignore > > emails if they don't have time that week. > > > > * It helps scaling out the triage process without poking people around > > and without having to do a "call for volunteers" every meeting/cycle/etc > > > > The above doesn't solve the problme completely but just like reviews, > > it'd be an optional, completely opt-in process that people can sign up > > for. > > > > My experience in Ubuntu, where we encouraged non-developers to triage > bugs, was that non-developers often ask the wrong questions and > sometimes even harm the process by putting something in the wrong > priority or state because of a lack of deep understanding. > > Triage in a hospital is done by experienced nurses and doctors working > together, not "triagers". This is because it may not always be obvious > to somebody just how important a problem is. We have the same set of > problems. The most important thing is that developers see it as an > important task and take part. New volunteers should be getting involved > at every level, not just bug triage. > ++, nice analogy. Another problem I have seen, is we need to constantly re-triage bugs, as just because a bug was marked as confirmed 6 months ago doesn't mean it is still valid. > > I think the best approach to this, like reviews, is to have a place > where users can go to drive the triage workload to 0. For instance, the > ubuntu server team had this report for triage: > > http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ubuntu-server/triage-report.html > > Sadly, it looks like they're overwhelmed or have abandoned the effort > (I hope this doesn't say something about Ubuntu server itself..), but > the basic process was to move bugs off these lists. I'm sure if we ask > nice the author of that code will share it with us and we could adapt > it for OpenStack projects. > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev