On 24 May 2016 at 18:05, Doug Hellmann <d...@doughellmann.com> wrote:
> Excerpts from Markus Zoeller's message of 2016-05-24 11:00:35 +0200: > > On 24.05.2016 09:34, Duncan Thomas wrote: > > > Cinder bugs list was far more manageable once this had been done. > > > > > > It is worth sharing the tool for this? I realise it's fairly trivial to > > > write one, but some standardisation on the comment format etc seems > > > valuable, particularly for Q/A folks who work between different > projects. > > > > A first draft (without the actual expiring) is at [1]. I'm going to > > finish it this week. If there is a place in an OpenStack repo, just give > > me a pointer and I'll push a change. > > > > > On 23 May 2016 at 14:02, Markus Zoeller <mzoel...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > wrote: > > > > > >> TL;DR: Automatic closing of 185 bug reports which are older than 18 > > >> months in the week R-13. Skipping specific bug reports is possible. A > > >> bug report comment explains the reasons. > > >> [...] > > > > References: > > [1] > > > https://github.com/markuszoeller/openstack/blob/master/scripts/launchpad/expire_old_bug_reports.py > > > > Feel free to submit that to the openstack-infra/release-tools repo. We > have some other tools in that repo for managing launchpad bugs. > > Doug Rather that blanket expiring old bugs, it might seem better to expire bugs which are in non-triaged state which haven't had activity for >18 months. This would seem like a less aggressive approach to closing issues which haven't managed to reach triaged state and are otherwise stale. This information is available in the API and i'd be happy to suggest a review to change to this model if it is agreed. Thanks -- Kind Regards, Dave Walker
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev