Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Requirement for bug when reno is present

[Jeffrey Zhang]

release note just generate a bunch of html file. We can not use them for
track bug/issue.

For example, how to trace the backport/revert/re-open status for some
issue/feature if the reno notes is the only thing we have?

The reno is just a releasenote tool. It is not helpful for project
management.

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 6:42 PM, Paul Bourke  wrote:

> Kolla,
>
> Do people feel we still want to require a bug-id in the commit message for
> features, when reno notes are present? My understanding is that till now
> we've required people to add bugs for non trivial features in order to
> track them as part of releases. Does/should reno supersede this?
>
> -Paul
>
> __
> 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
>



-- 
Regards,
Jeffrey Zhang
Blog: http://xcodest.me
__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Requirement for bug when reno is present

[Paul Bourke]

sdake kindly took the time to explain the release process. Logs are 
here: 
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-kolla/%23openstack-kolla.2016-09-01.log.html#t2016-09-01T09:06:49


On 30/08/16 20:31, Christian Berendt wrote:

On 30 Aug 2016, at 12:42, Paul Bourke  wrote:

Do people feel we still want to require a bug-id in the commit message for 
features, when reno notes are present? My understanding is that till now we've 
required people to add bugs for non trivial features in order to track them as 
part of releases. Does/should reno supersede this?


I think it makes sense to keep the bug/blueprint id because some of our 
features are distributed in several reviews and only one of the reviews 
includes the release note. When removing the bug/blueprint ids from the commit 
message when a reno note will be added with one of the reviews it will be 
difficult to track the relations.

Christian.



__
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



__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Requirement for bug when reno is present

[Steven Dake (stdake)]

From: Dave Walker <em...@daviey.com<mailto:em...@daviey.com>>
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
Date: Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 4:24 AM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Requirement for bug when reno is present


On 30 August 2016 at 11:42, Paul Bourke 
<paul.bou...@oracle.com<mailto:paul.bou...@oracle.com>> wrote:
Kolla,

Do people feel we still want to require a bug-id in the commit message for 
features, when reno notes are present? My understanding is that till now we've 
required people to add bugs for non trivial features in order to track them as 
part of releases. Does/should reno supersede this?

-Paul

I'm guess you raised this because my recent comment on a change you did... but 
actually, I agree with you.  I don't think it is a good process, but 
standardisation is key.

The issue comes around because Kolla wanted to use bugs to track potential 
backports to stable/*.  However, I think this is generally overrated and the 
Change-ID is suitable for this purpose.

Open to other options in the future.  Can you explain how change Ids can be 
used to track which bugs need to be backported?


I really hate raising bugs "just because", when realistically many of them are 
not bugs and contain one-line style "Add this $feature" bug description.  It 
just burns through Launchpad bug numbers, and will likely never be looked at 
again.

We shouldn't be using bugs for features IMO and definitely not for release 
candidates where an FFE hasn't been given.

Regards
-seve


--
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Requirement for bug when reno is present

[Christian Berendt]

> On 30 Aug 2016, at 12:42, Paul Bourke  wrote:
> 
> Do people feel we still want to require a bug-id in the commit message for 
> features, when reno notes are present? My understanding is that till now 
> we've required people to add bugs for non trivial features in order to track 
> them as part of releases. Does/should reno supersede this?

I think it makes sense to keep the bug/blueprint id because some of our 
features are distributed in several reviews and only one of the reviews 
includes the release note. When removing the bug/blueprint ids from the commit 
message when a reno note will be added with one of the reviews it will be 
difficult to track the relations.

Christian.


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Requirement for bug when reno is present

[Steven Dake (stdake)]

The bug id and blueprint id are for automatic tracking via Launchpad.  If they 
are omitted, managing the release becomes especially difficult.  Unfortunately 
launchpad doesn't know about reno because then I'd agree, that would be an 
optimal way too go.

Regards
-steve




On 8/30/16, 3:42 AM, "Paul Bourke"  wrote:

>Kolla,
>
>Do people feel we still want to require a bug-id in the commit message 
>for features, when reno notes are present? My understanding is that till 
>now we've required people to add bugs for non trivial features in order 
>to track them as part of releases. Does/should reno supersede this?
>
>-Paul
>
>__
>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
__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Requirement for bug when reno is present

[Dave Walker]

On 30 August 2016 at 11:42, Paul Bourke  wrote:

> Kolla,
>
> Do people feel we still want to require a bug-id in the commit message for
> features, when reno notes are present? My understanding is that till now
> we've required people to add bugs for non trivial features in order to
> track them as part of releases. Does/should reno supersede this?
>
> -Paul
>

I'm guess you raised this because my recent comment on a change you did...
but actually, I agree with you.  I don't think it is a good process, but
standardisation is key.

The issue comes around because Kolla wanted to use bugs to track potential
backports to stable/*.  However, I think this is generally overrated and
the Change-ID is suitable for this purpose.

I really hate raising bugs "just because", when realistically many of them
are not bugs and contain one-line style "Add this $feature" bug
description.  It just burns through Launchpad bug numbers, and will likely
never be looked at again.

--
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

[openstack-dev] [kolla] Requirement for bug when reno is present

[Paul Bourke]

Kolla,

Do people feel we still want to require a bug-id in the commit message 
for features, when reno notes are present? My understanding is that till 
now we've required people to add bugs for non trivial features in order 
to track them as part of releases. Does/should reno supersede this?


-Paul

__
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