Re: Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

2014-06-02 Thread Gijs Kruitbosch
Playing devil's advocate for a bit - are there more non-checkin-needed 
backouts? That is, people who, err, feel it is unnecessary to push to 
try to land something with checkin-needed, and therefore then land it 
themselves and burn the tree? :-)


And also: has the throughput in checkin-needed landings gone down, ie 
are we trading this off against making it a teeny bit harder for 
people to contribute? (not intending a value judgment there - it is 
likely still the right thing to do, but it would be good to know)


~ Gijs

On 30/05/2014 16:17, Ryan VanderMeulen wrote:

Just as a quick follow-up to this - we're already seeing much lower 
checkin-needed backout rates since this change went into affect, so thank you 
all for your help!

-Ryan

- Original Message -
From: Ryan VanderMeulen rvandermeu...@mozilla.com
To: dev-b2g dev-...@lists.mozilla.org, dev.platform 
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org, dev-g...@lists.mozilla.org
Cc: Sheriffs sheri...@mozilla.com
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 4:54:29 PM
Subject: Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

As many of you are aware, the sheriff team has been assisting with landing 
checkin-needed bugs for some time now. However, we've also had to deal with the 
fallout of a higher than average bustage frequency from them. As much as we 
enjoy shooting ourselves in the foot, our team has decided that we needed to 
tweak our process a bit to avoid tree closures and wasted time and energy.

Therefore, our team has decided that we will now require that a link to a 
recent Try run be provided when requesting checkin before we will land the 
patch. To be clear, this *ONLY* affects checkin-needed bugs where we're 
assisting with the landing. We have no desire to police what other developers 
do before pushing. As has always been the case, developers are expected to 
ensure that their patches have received adequate testing prior to pushing 
whether they are receiving our assistance or not.

Our team is also not going to dictate which specific builds/tests are required. 
We're not experts in your code and we'll defer to your judgment as to what 
counts as sufficient testing. As mentioned earlier today in another post, if in 
doubt, we do have a set of general best practices for Try that can be used as a 
guide [1]. We just want to ensure that patches have at least received some 
baseline level of testing before being pushed to production. We've been testing 
the water with this policy for the past couple weeks and have already seen a 
reduction in the number of backouts needed.

For those of you mentoring bugs for new contributors, please also keep this in 
mind in order to keep patches from being held up in landing. And consider 
vouching for Level 1 commit access to further empower those contributors!

Thanks!

-Ryan

[1] https://wiki.mozilla.org/Sheriffing/How:To:Recommended_Try_Practices



___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform


Re: Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

2014-05-30 Thread Ryan VanderMeulen
Just as a quick follow-up to this - we're already seeing much lower 
checkin-needed backout rates since this change went into affect, so thank you 
all for your help!

-Ryan

- Original Message -
From: Ryan VanderMeulen rvandermeu...@mozilla.com
To: dev-b2g dev-...@lists.mozilla.org, dev.platform 
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org, dev-g...@lists.mozilla.org
Cc: Sheriffs sheri...@mozilla.com
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 4:54:29 PM
Subject: Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

As many of you are aware, the sheriff team has been assisting with landing 
checkin-needed bugs for some time now. However, we've also had to deal with the 
fallout of a higher than average bustage frequency from them. As much as we 
enjoy shooting ourselves in the foot, our team has decided that we needed to 
tweak our process a bit to avoid tree closures and wasted time and energy.

Therefore, our team has decided that we will now require that a link to a 
recent Try run be provided when requesting checkin before we will land the 
patch. To be clear, this *ONLY* affects checkin-needed bugs where we're 
assisting with the landing. We have no desire to police what other developers 
do before pushing. As has always been the case, developers are expected to 
ensure that their patches have received adequate testing prior to pushing 
whether they are receiving our assistance or not.

Our team is also not going to dictate which specific builds/tests are required. 
We're not experts in your code and we'll defer to your judgment as to what 
counts as sufficient testing. As mentioned earlier today in another post, if in 
doubt, we do have a set of general best practices for Try that can be used as a 
guide [1]. We just want to ensure that patches have at least received some 
baseline level of testing before being pushed to production. We've been testing 
the water with this policy for the past couple weeks and have already seen a 
reduction in the number of backouts needed.

For those of you mentoring bugs for new contributors, please also keep this in 
mind in order to keep patches from being held up in landing. And consider 
vouching for Level 1 commit access to further empower those contributors!

Thanks!

-Ryan

[1] https://wiki.mozilla.org/Sheriffing/How:To:Recommended_Try_Practices
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform


Re: Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

2014-05-27 Thread Taras Glek



Ehsan Akhgari wrote:

On 2014-05-21, 5:15 PM, Chris Peterson wrote:

On 5/21/14, 1:51 PM, Mike Conley wrote:

Or, alternatively, attempt to automate this with Autoland
(https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=657828).


Is anyone actively working on Autoland? Rail had been working on
Autoland, but when I spoke with him in 2013 Q4, I think he said he would
not have time to work on it in 2014 Q1.

For a tool as important and often requested as Autoland, we should get
it on someone's schedule. :)


I think Taras knows more details.
I expect some exciting stuff in 
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1005235  soon

___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform


Re: Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

2014-05-21 Thread Ryan VanderMeulen
 One issue I often run into is that the contributor doesn't have access to
 try, and pushing it on their behalf disrupts the rhythm of the other things
 I'm doing.

From http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/commit-access-policy/

Level 1 - Try/User/Incubator Access
Because this is all it gives, this sort of access can be given out generously 
to anyone who would find it convenient when helping us or working on a 
developer's personal project, without worrying about them affecting core code. 
In other words, the target audience for this sort of access might be defined as 
friends of and collaborators with Mozilla.

At least to me, that reads as vouch early and vouch often!. Something 
something...teach a man to fish...something something... :)

-Ryan
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform


Re: Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

2014-05-21 Thread Steve Fink
On Wed 21 May 2014 08:42:28 AM PDT, Ryan VanderMeulen wrote:
 Level 1 - Try/User/Incubator Access
 Because this is all it gives, this sort of access can be given out generously 
 to anyone who would find it convenient when helping us or working on a 
 developer's personal project, without worrying about them affecting core 
 code. In other words, the target audience for this sort of access might be 
 defined as friends of and collaborators with Mozilla.

 At least to me, that reads as vouch early and vouch often!. Something 
 something...teach a man to fish...something something... :)

I think the quote you're looking for is, if you teach a man to fish, 
you'd better teach him how to gut and clean the fish at the same time. 
Otherwise you'll be forever stuck doing it for him.

Or not.

___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform


Re: Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

2014-05-21 Thread Bobby Holley
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Steve Fink sf...@mozilla.com wrote:

 On Wed 21 May 2014 08:42:28 AM PDT, Ryan VanderMeulen wrote:
  Level 1 - Try/User/Incubator Access
  Because this is all it gives, this sort of access can be given out
 generously to anyone who would find it convenient when helping us or
 working on a developer's personal project, without worrying about them
 affecting core code. In other words, the target audience for this sort of
 access might be defined as friends of and collaborators with Mozilla.
 
  At least to me, that reads as vouch early and vouch often!. Something
 something...teach a man to fish...something something... :)

 I think the quote you're looking for is, if you teach a man to fish,
 you'd better teach him how to gut and clean the fish at the same time.
 Otherwise you'll be forever stuck doing it for him.


Is it really the most effective learning experience and use of everyone's
time to make first-patch contributors get set up with try access?

I try to mentor as many bugs as possible. My ideal workflow would be to
grant r+, suggest a try: string, and set checkin-needed in a single act,
without having to determine whether the contributor has try access and/or
editbugs. If we already have people scanning for checkin-needed and looking
for try pushes, it seems pretty logical to have them just trigger any
missing pushes.

bholley
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform


Re: Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

2014-05-21 Thread Mike Conley
 I try to mentor as many bugs as possible. My ideal workflow would be to
 grant r+, suggest a try: string, and set checkin-needed in a single act,
 without having to determine whether the contributor has try access and/or
 editbugs. If we already have people scanning for checkin-needed and looking
 for try pushes, it seems pretty logical to have them just trigger any
 missing pushes.

Or, alternatively, attempt to automate this with Autoland
(https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=657828).

I think we should lean on that for this use case, personally.

On 21/05/2014 3:29 PM, Bobby Holley wrote:
 On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Steve Fink sf...@mozilla.com wrote:
 
 On Wed 21 May 2014 08:42:28 AM PDT, Ryan VanderMeulen wrote:
 Level 1 - Try/User/Incubator Access
 Because this is all it gives, this sort of access can be given out
 generously to anyone who would find it convenient when helping us or
 working on a developer's personal project, without worrying about them
 affecting core code. In other words, the target audience for this sort of
 access might be defined as friends of and collaborators with Mozilla.

 At least to me, that reads as vouch early and vouch often!. Something
 something...teach a man to fish...something something... :)

 I think the quote you're looking for is, if you teach a man to fish,
 you'd better teach him how to gut and clean the fish at the same time.
 Otherwise you'll be forever stuck doing it for him.

 
 Is it really the most effective learning experience and use of everyone's
 time to make first-patch contributors get set up with try access?
 
 I try to mentor as many bugs as possible. My ideal workflow would be to
 grant r+, suggest a try: string, and set checkin-needed in a single act,
 without having to determine whether the contributor has try access and/or
 editbugs. If we already have people scanning for checkin-needed and looking
 for try pushes, it seems pretty logical to have them just trigger any
 missing pushes.
 
 bholley
 ___
 dev-platform mailing list
 dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
 https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
 
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform


Re: Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

2014-05-21 Thread Chris Peterson

On 5/21/14, 1:51 PM, Mike Conley wrote:

Or, alternatively, attempt to automate this with Autoland
(https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=657828).


Is anyone actively working on Autoland? Rail had been working on 
Autoland, but when I spoke with him in 2013 Q4, I think he said he would 
not have time to work on it in 2014 Q1.


For a tool as important and often requested as Autoland, we should get 
it on someone's schedule. :)



chris
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform


Re: Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

2014-05-21 Thread Ehsan Akhgari

On 2014-05-21, 5:15 PM, Chris Peterson wrote:

On 5/21/14, 1:51 PM, Mike Conley wrote:

Or, alternatively, attempt to automate this with Autoland
(https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=657828).


Is anyone actively working on Autoland? Rail had been working on
Autoland, but when I spoke with him in 2013 Q4, I think he said he would
not have time to work on it in 2014 Q1.

For a tool as important and often requested as Autoland, we should get
it on someone's schedule. :)


I think Taras knows more details.

___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform


Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

2014-05-19 Thread Ryan VanderMeulen
As many of you are aware, the sheriff team has been assisting with landing 
checkin-needed bugs for some time now. However, we've also had to deal with the 
fallout of a higher than average bustage frequency from them. As much as we 
enjoy shooting ourselves in the foot, our team has decided that we needed to 
tweak our process a bit to avoid tree closures and wasted time and energy.

Therefore, our team has decided that we will now require that a link to a 
recent Try run be provided when requesting checkin before we will land the 
patch. To be clear, this *ONLY* affects checkin-needed bugs where we're 
assisting with the landing. We have no desire to police what other developers 
do before pushing. As has always been the case, developers are expected to 
ensure that their patches have received adequate testing prior to pushing 
whether they are receiving our assistance or not.

Our team is also not going to dictate which specific builds/tests are required. 
We're not experts in your code and we'll defer to your judgment as to what 
counts as sufficient testing. As mentioned earlier today in another post, if in 
doubt, we do have a set of general best practices for Try that can be used as a 
guide [1]. We just want to ensure that patches have at least received some 
baseline level of testing before being pushed to production. We've been testing 
the water with this policy for the past couple weeks and have already seen a 
reduction in the number of backouts needed.

For those of you mentoring bugs for new contributors, please also keep this in 
mind in order to keep patches from being held up in landing. And consider 
vouching for Level 1 commit access to further empower those contributors!

Thanks!

-Ryan

[1] https://wiki.mozilla.org/Sheriffing/How:To:Recommended_Try_Practices
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform


Re: Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

2014-05-19 Thread Bobby Holley
(Reducing the thread scope for the followup)

One issue I often run into is that the contributor doesn't have access to
try, and pushing it on their behalf disrupts the rhythm of the other things
I'm doing. If we go forward with this, can we also get some kind of
sheriff-assisted try push flag? Something like try-needed?


On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Ryan VanderMeulen 
rvandermeu...@mozilla.com wrote:

 As many of you are aware, the sheriff team has been assisting with landing
 checkin-needed bugs for some time now. However, we've also had to deal with
 the fallout of a higher than average bustage frequency from them. As much
 as we enjoy shooting ourselves in the foot, our team has decided that we
 needed to tweak our process a bit to avoid tree closures and wasted time
 and energy.

 Therefore, our team has decided that we will now require that a link to a
 recent Try run be provided when requesting checkin before we will land the
 patch. To be clear, this *ONLY* affects checkin-needed bugs where we're
 assisting with the landing. We have no desire to police what other
 developers do before pushing. As has always been the case, developers are
 expected to ensure that their patches have received adequate testing prior
 to pushing whether they are receiving our assistance or not.

 Our team is also not going to dictate which specific builds/tests are
 required. We're not experts in your code and we'll defer to your judgment
 as to what counts as sufficient testing. As mentioned earlier today in
 another post, if in doubt, we do have a set of general best practices for
 Try that can be used as a guide [1]. We just want to ensure that patches
 have at least received some baseline level of testing before being pushed
 to production. We've been testing the water with this policy for the past
 couple weeks and have already seen a reduction in the number of backouts
 needed.

 For those of you mentoring bugs for new contributors, please also keep
 this in mind in order to keep patches from being held up in landing. And
 consider vouching for Level 1 commit access to further empower those
 contributors!

 Thanks!

 -Ryan

 [1] https://wiki.mozilla.org/Sheriffing/How:To:Recommended_Try_Practices
 ___
 dev-platform mailing list
 dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
 https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform


Re: Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

2014-05-19 Thread Jonas Sicking
Try-from-bugzilla would be awesome!

/ Jonas

On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Bobby Holley bobbyhol...@gmail.com wrote:
 (Reducing the thread scope for the followup)

 One issue I often run into is that the contributor doesn't have access to
 try, and pushing it on their behalf disrupts the rhythm of the other things
 I'm doing. If we go forward with this, can we also get some kind of
 sheriff-assisted try push flag? Something like try-needed?


 On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Ryan VanderMeulen 
 rvandermeu...@mozilla.com wrote:

 As many of you are aware, the sheriff team has been assisting with landing
 checkin-needed bugs for some time now. However, we've also had to deal with
 the fallout of a higher than average bustage frequency from them. As much
 as we enjoy shooting ourselves in the foot, our team has decided that we
 needed to tweak our process a bit to avoid tree closures and wasted time
 and energy.

 Therefore, our team has decided that we will now require that a link to a
 recent Try run be provided when requesting checkin before we will land the
 patch. To be clear, this *ONLY* affects checkin-needed bugs where we're
 assisting with the landing. We have no desire to police what other
 developers do before pushing. As has always been the case, developers are
 expected to ensure that their patches have received adequate testing prior
 to pushing whether they are receiving our assistance or not.

 Our team is also not going to dictate which specific builds/tests are
 required. We're not experts in your code and we'll defer to your judgment
 as to what counts as sufficient testing. As mentioned earlier today in
 another post, if in doubt, we do have a set of general best practices for
 Try that can be used as a guide [1]. We just want to ensure that patches
 have at least received some baseline level of testing before being pushed
 to production. We've been testing the water with this policy for the past
 couple weeks and have already seen a reduction in the number of backouts
 needed.

 For those of you mentoring bugs for new contributors, please also keep
 this in mind in order to keep patches from being held up in landing. And
 consider vouching for Level 1 commit access to further empower those
 contributors!

 Thanks!

 -Ryan

 [1] https://wiki.mozilla.org/Sheriffing/How:To:Recommended_Try_Practices
 ___
 dev-platform mailing list
 dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
 https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

 ___
 dev-platform mailing list
 dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
 https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform