Re: [Pulp-dev] Dealing with our redmine backlog

[David Davis]

We talked this over some more today at the pulpcore meeting. I think we're
going to instead go through the issues and close them out manually. I've
scheduled a 2 hour session for a week from Monday. Please send me an email
if you'd like to attend.

David


On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 12:47 PM David Davis  wrote:

> Per our conversation this morning, I have created a spreadsheet of the 100
> oldest issues at NEW in the Pulp project. I filtered out issues that were
> tagged with Katello or that had a BZ attached to them.
>
> As for which issues to keep open: I added a column called "Champion" where
> people could add their name if they want to champion an issue, push it
> forward, and ensure that it could be picked up and worked on. Any issue
> that has a Champion attached to it will be left at NEW; the rest will be
> closed as WONTFIX.
>
> I'll propose a deadline of September 1st before I close out the issues. As
> always, feedback is welcome.
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Dm1Z2phjJY1CThOD1zzBfwqt16SyO8AJ-ShkbBIRQKI/edit?usp=sharing
>
> David
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:44 PM Robin Chan  wrote:
>
>> I'd be OK with using time last edited or created being over some value (6
>> months) as an auto-close with a note to re-open. For older bug reports or
>> feature requests - if a user has lived without it for a long time without
>> contributing a fix, then some re-engagement to re-open an issue helps
>> provide some priority assessment.
>>
>> Robin Chan
>>
>> She/Her/Hers
>>
>> Satellite Software Engineering Manager - Pulp
>>
>> Red Hat 
>>
>> IRC: rchan
>>
>> Red Hat respects your work life balance. Therefore there is no need to
>> answer this email out of your office hours.
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 11:34 AM David Davis 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> After open floor, the consensus was to give all users the ability to
>>> reopen issues aside from dupes or completed/released. I've done that.
>>>
>>> I think we want to go through open issues and close them out or groom
>>> them regardless of what we decide about doing a mass close so I went ahead
>>> and added an agenda item to our pulpcore meeting.
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 10:49 AM Tatiana Tereshchenko <
>>> ttere...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
 +1 to allow all users to re-open issues.
 If ^, then +1 to closing as many backlog issues as seems needed.

 We can close based on the date and then review manually items with
 redmine issue number less than N - old ones, to see if they have recent
 comments or just spam.

 On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 6:08 PM Ina Panova  wrote:

>
>
>
> 
> Regards,
>
> Ina Panova
> Senior Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
>
> "Do not go where the path may lead,
>  go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 8:54 PM David Davis 
> wrote:
>
>> We've been discussing the possibility of closing issues in redmine
>> due to the overwhelming number of issues at NEW. Currently, we have 930
>> issues at NEW and I think that exceeds our capacity to address each issue
>> individually.
>>
>> The first item I want to bring up for discussion is expanding the
>> ability for users to reopen closed issues. Currently only authors can
>> reopen issues at CLOSED excluding CLOSED - DUPLICATE and CLOSED - 
>> COMPLETE.
>> Should we expand this to all redmine users?
>>
>
> +1 to expand it to all users.
>
>>
>> If we expand this permission, this should give us the ability to
>> safely close out issues that fit some criteria. I looked at the pulpcore
>> issues and limited the issues to just ones without a Katello tag or a BZ
>> and that were created before 2020[0]. This still leaves us with almost 
>> 300
>> NEW issues in pulpcore which still seems unrealistic to go through. Any
>> thoughts on what criteria to use?
>>
>
> We could also exclude issues that have Pulp2 tag.
> Even if we end up having 300 issues to process, I know that sounds a
> lot, but we can regularly dedicate 5 mins(timeboxed!) of our pulpcore team
> meeting, or open floor to go through. For some issues it is enough to read
> the title to make a decision.
> I *think* this might be a feasible idea, look how many and good
> improvements we did in redmine having it on the agenda for each open 
> floor.
>
> Alsom, what will be the state of the issues we are going to mass close
> - CLOSED-WON'TFIX?
>
>>
>> [0] It would be better to use updated at to scope issues but
>> unfortunately a lot of older issues have been updated recently due to 
>> spam
>> comment
>>
>
>> David
>> ___
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
>> 

Re: [Pulp-dev] Dealing with our redmine backlog

[David Davis]

Per our conversation this morning, I have created a spreadsheet of the 100
oldest issues at NEW in the Pulp project. I filtered out issues that were
tagged with Katello or that had a BZ attached to them.

As for which issues to keep open: I added a column called "Champion" where
people could add their name if they want to champion an issue, push it
forward, and ensure that it could be picked up and worked on. Any issue
that has a Champion attached to it will be left at NEW; the rest will be
closed as WONTFIX.

I'll propose a deadline of September 1st before I close out the issues. As
always, feedback is welcome.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Dm1Z2phjJY1CThOD1zzBfwqt16SyO8AJ-ShkbBIRQKI/edit?usp=sharing

David


On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:44 PM Robin Chan  wrote:

> I'd be OK with using time last edited or created being over some value (6
> months) as an auto-close with a note to re-open. For older bug reports or
> feature requests - if a user has lived without it for a long time without
> contributing a fix, then some re-engagement to re-open an issue helps
> provide some priority assessment.
>
> Robin Chan
>
> She/Her/Hers
>
> Satellite Software Engineering Manager - Pulp
>
> Red Hat 
>
> IRC: rchan
>
> Red Hat respects your work life balance. Therefore there is no need to
> answer this email out of your office hours.
> 
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 11:34 AM David Davis  wrote:
>
>> After open floor, the consensus was to give all users the ability to
>> reopen issues aside from dupes or completed/released. I've done that.
>>
>> I think we want to go through open issues and close them out or groom
>> them regardless of what we decide about doing a mass close so I went ahead
>> and added an agenda item to our pulpcore meeting.
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 10:49 AM Tatiana Tereshchenko 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 to allow all users to re-open issues.
>>> If ^, then +1 to closing as many backlog issues as seems needed.
>>>
>>> We can close based on the date and then review manually items with
>>> redmine issue number less than N - old ones, to see if they have recent
>>> comments or just spam.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 6:08 PM Ina Panova  wrote:
>>>



 
 Regards,

 Ina Panova
 Senior Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.

 "Do not go where the path may lead,
  go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."


 On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 8:54 PM David Davis 
 wrote:

> We've been discussing the possibility of closing issues in redmine due
> to the overwhelming number of issues at NEW. Currently, we have 930 issues
> at NEW and I think that exceeds our capacity to address each issue
> individually.
>
> The first item I want to bring up for discussion is expanding the
> ability for users to reopen closed issues. Currently only authors can
> reopen issues at CLOSED excluding CLOSED - DUPLICATE and CLOSED - 
> COMPLETE.
> Should we expand this to all redmine users?
>

 +1 to expand it to all users.

>
> If we expand this permission, this should give us the ability to
> safely close out issues that fit some criteria. I looked at the pulpcore
> issues and limited the issues to just ones without a Katello tag or a BZ
> and that were created before 2020[0]. This still leaves us with almost 300
> NEW issues in pulpcore which still seems unrealistic to go through. Any
> thoughts on what criteria to use?
>

 We could also exclude issues that have Pulp2 tag.
 Even if we end up having 300 issues to process, I know that sounds a
 lot, but we can regularly dedicate 5 mins(timeboxed!) of our pulpcore team
 meeting, or open floor to go through. For some issues it is enough to read
 the title to make a decision.
 I *think* this might be a feasible idea, look how many and good
 improvements we did in redmine having it on the agenda for each open floor.

 Alsom, what will be the state of the issues we are going to mass close
 - CLOSED-WON'TFIX?

>
> [0] It would be better to use updated at to scope issues but
> unfortunately a lot of older issues have been updated recently due to spam
> comment
>

> David
> ___
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
 ___
 Pulp-dev mailing list
 Pulp-dev@redhat.com
 https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

>>> ___
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>
>
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] Dealing with our redmine backlog

[David Davis]

After open floor, the consensus was to give all users the ability to reopen
issues aside from dupes or completed/released. I've done that.

I think we want to go through open issues and close them out or groom them
regardless of what we decide about doing a mass close so I went ahead and
added an agenda item to our pulpcore meeting.

David


On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 10:49 AM Tatiana Tereshchenko 
wrote:

> +1 to allow all users to re-open issues.
> If ^, then +1 to closing as many backlog issues as seems needed.
>
> We can close based on the date and then review manually items with redmine
> issue number less than N - old ones, to see if they have recent comments or
> just spam.
>
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 6:08 PM Ina Panova  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ina Panova
>> Senior Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
>>
>> "Do not go where the path may lead,
>>  go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 8:54 PM David Davis  wrote:
>>
>>> We've been discussing the possibility of closing issues in redmine due
>>> to the overwhelming number of issues at NEW. Currently, we have 930 issues
>>> at NEW and I think that exceeds our capacity to address each issue
>>> individually.
>>>
>>> The first item I want to bring up for discussion is expanding the
>>> ability for users to reopen closed issues. Currently only authors can
>>> reopen issues at CLOSED excluding CLOSED - DUPLICATE and CLOSED - COMPLETE.
>>> Should we expand this to all redmine users?
>>>
>>
>> +1 to expand it to all users.
>>
>>>
>>> If we expand this permission, this should give us the ability to safely
>>> close out issues that fit some criteria. I looked at the pulpcore issues
>>> and limited the issues to just ones without a Katello tag or a BZ and that
>>> were created before 2020[0]. This still leaves us with almost 300 NEW
>>> issues in pulpcore which still seems unrealistic to go through. Any
>>> thoughts on what criteria to use?
>>>
>>
>> We could also exclude issues that have Pulp2 tag.
>> Even if we end up having 300 issues to process, I know that sounds a lot,
>> but we can regularly dedicate 5 mins(timeboxed!) of our pulpcore team
>> meeting, or open floor to go through. For some issues it is enough to read
>> the title to make a decision.
>> I *think* this might be a feasible idea, look how many and good
>> improvements we did in redmine having it on the agenda for each open floor.
>>
>> Alsom, what will be the state of the issues we are going to mass close -
>> CLOSED-WON'TFIX?
>>
>>>
>>> [0] It would be better to use updated at to scope issues but
>>> unfortunately a lot of older issues have been updated recently due to spam
>>> comment
>>>
>>
>>> David
>>> ___
>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>
>> ___
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>
>
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] Dealing with our redmine backlog

[Tatiana Tereshchenko]

+1 to allow all users to re-open issues.
If ^, then +1 to closing as many backlog issues as seems needed.

We can close based on the date and then review manually items with redmine
issue number less than N - old ones, to see if they have recent comments or
just spam.

On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 6:08 PM Ina Panova  wrote:

>
>
>
> 
> Regards,
>
> Ina Panova
> Senior Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
>
> "Do not go where the path may lead,
>  go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 8:54 PM David Davis  wrote:
>
>> We've been discussing the possibility of closing issues in redmine due to
>> the overwhelming number of issues at NEW. Currently, we have 930 issues at
>> NEW and I think that exceeds our capacity to address each issue
>> individually.
>>
>> The first item I want to bring up for discussion is expanding the ability
>> for users to reopen closed issues. Currently only authors can reopen issues
>> at CLOSED excluding CLOSED - DUPLICATE and CLOSED - COMPLETE. Should we
>> expand this to all redmine users?
>>
>
> +1 to expand it to all users.
>
>>
>> If we expand this permission, this should give us the ability to safely
>> close out issues that fit some criteria. I looked at the pulpcore issues
>> and limited the issues to just ones without a Katello tag or a BZ and that
>> were created before 2020[0]. This still leaves us with almost 300 NEW
>> issues in pulpcore which still seems unrealistic to go through. Any
>> thoughts on what criteria to use?
>>
>
> We could also exclude issues that have Pulp2 tag.
> Even if we end up having 300 issues to process, I know that sounds a lot,
> but we can regularly dedicate 5 mins(timeboxed!) of our pulpcore team
> meeting, or open floor to go through. For some issues it is enough to read
> the title to make a decision.
> I *think* this might be a feasible idea, look how many and good
> improvements we did in redmine having it on the agenda for each open floor.
>
> Alsom, what will be the state of the issues we are going to mass close -
> CLOSED-WON'TFIX?
>
>>
>> [0] It would be better to use updated at to scope issues but
>> unfortunately a lot of older issues have been updated recently due to spam
>> comment
>>
>
>> David
>> ___
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>
> ___
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] Dealing with our redmine backlog

[Ina Panova]

Regards,

Ina Panova
Senior Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.

"Do not go where the path may lead,
 go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."


On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 8:54 PM David Davis  wrote:

> We've been discussing the possibility of closing issues in redmine due to
> the overwhelming number of issues at NEW. Currently, we have 930 issues at
> NEW and I think that exceeds our capacity to address each issue
> individually.
>
> The first item I want to bring up for discussion is expanding the ability
> for users to reopen closed issues. Currently only authors can reopen issues
> at CLOSED excluding CLOSED - DUPLICATE and CLOSED - COMPLETE. Should we
> expand this to all redmine users?
>

+1 to expand it to all users.

>
> If we expand this permission, this should give us the ability to safely
> close out issues that fit some criteria. I looked at the pulpcore issues
> and limited the issues to just ones without a Katello tag or a BZ and that
> were created before 2020[0]. This still leaves us with almost 300 NEW
> issues in pulpcore which still seems unrealistic to go through. Any
> thoughts on what criteria to use?
>

We could also exclude issues that have Pulp2 tag.
Even if we end up having 300 issues to process, I know that sounds a lot,
but we can regularly dedicate 5 mins(timeboxed!) of our pulpcore team
meeting, or open floor to go through. For some issues it is enough to read
the title to make a decision.
I *think* this might be a feasible idea, look how many and good
improvements we did in redmine having it on the agenda for each open floor.

Alsom, what will be the state of the issues we are going to mass close -
CLOSED-WON'TFIX?

>
> [0] It would be better to use updated at to scope issues but unfortunately
> a lot of older issues have been updated recently due to spam comment
>

> David
> ___
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

[Pulp-dev] Dealing with our redmine backlog

[David Davis]

We've been discussing the possibility of closing issues in redmine due to
the overwhelming number of issues at NEW. Currently, we have 930 issues at
NEW and I think that exceeds our capacity to address each issue
individually.

The first item I want to bring up for discussion is expanding the ability
for users to reopen closed issues. Currently only authors can reopen issues
at CLOSED excluding CLOSED - DUPLICATE and CLOSED - COMPLETE. Should we
expand this to all redmine users?

If we expand this permission, this should give us the ability to safely
close out issues that fit some criteria. I looked at the pulpcore issues
and limited the issues to just ones without a Katello tag or a BZ and that
were created before 2020[0]. This still leaves us with almost 300 NEW
issues in pulpcore which still seems unrealistic to go through. Any
thoughts on what criteria to use?

[0] It would be better to use updated at to scope issues but unfortunately
a lot of older issues have been updated recently due to spam comments

David
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev