Re: [foreman-dev] Regular Foreman-core issue triage?

On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 at 12:13, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden < ew...@kohlvanwijngaarden.nl> wrote: > +1 the open issues need to be reviewed. I don't know if this is the best > solution but can't hurt to get more eyes on them. > > What I don't see is something to go over old issues that have been >

Re: [foreman-dev] Regular Foreman-core issue triage?

+1 the open issues need to be reviewed. I don't know if this is the best solution but can't hurt to get more eyes on them. What I don't see is something to go over old issues that have been triaged at some point. I did that a while back for the installer and could close a few issues that had

Re: Re: [foreman-dev] Regular Foreman-core issue triage?

I do check Redmine issues everyday (http://projects.theforeman.org/projects/foreman/activity) If there are many, I restrict the search to just Foreman (with subprojects). Usually it doesn't take more than 30 minutes. I basically look for: - New issues: if they look critical or very easy I

Re: [foreman-dev] Regular Foreman-core issue triage?

On 15/11/17 07:42, Tomer Brisker wrote: > One concern though is the amount of time it would take We could time-limit it to one hour, and start with "New" issues each time, sorted by oldest first. That way anything we don't get to one week would be present the next week. That's still better than

Re: [foreman-dev] Regular Foreman-core issue triage?

It would be interesting to try giving this a try, I think right now we don't much insight into new issues raised and no prioritization of them. Previously Dominic used to do at least a minimal triage on all incoming issues, but right now I don't think anyone does that. One concern though is the

Re: [foreman-dev] Regular Foreman-core issue triage?

Bump - any thoughts here from the -dev community? Simple +1 or -1 or even a +0 for indifference would be great to just know where folks stand and whether this would be worth while. On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 8:28 AM, Eric D Helms wrote: > Writing this up inspired me to capture

Re: [foreman-dev] Regular Foreman-core issue triage?

Writing this up inspired me to capture it for the long term [1]. I'd be happy to run the first one or two given my experience with it (and assuming the timeslot works) just to get into the groove. Note that our process for triaging does require some overall Redmine process change with the way we

Re: [foreman-dev] Regular Foreman-core issue triage?

On 08/11/17 16:47, Eric D Helms wrote: [tons of useful stuff] Thanks Eric! I think that format will work for us too, might take a little practice. We'll need volunteers to be the runner, ofc ;) On 09/11/17 07:03, Marek Hulan wrote: > I'd join regularly, after few years for which I receive all >

Re: [foreman-dev] Regular Foreman-core issue triage?

I'd join regularly, after few years for which I receive all notifications from redmine, I can confirm there are bugs without much attention. If we won't have representatives from all areas, we might need some tooling to ping people in redmine tickets. Again, after few years, I can tell that

[foreman-dev] Regular Foreman-core issue triage?

So on IRC the idea of a regular issue triage for core issues in redmine came up, and I think it's a pretty good idea. I think we'd want to do this on a public stream (but recorded, I think), and then anyone interested can join. We'd need a minimum number of people involved to make it work, I