[openstack-dev] [all project] Treating recently seen recheck bugs as critical across the board
cbkyeoh at gmail.com
Tue Nov 26 11:44:03 UTC 2013
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 7:37 PM, Flavio Percoco <flavio at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 25/11/13 21:24 -0600, Dolph Mathews wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Robert Collins <
>> robertc at robertcollins.net>
>> I agree with the notion here (that fixing transient failures is
>> critically high
>> priority work for the community) -- but marking the bug as "critical"
>> is just a subjective abuse of the priority field. A non-critical bug is
>> necessarily non-critical work. The "critical" status should be reserved
>> issues that are actually non-shippable, catastrophically breaking issues.
> I agree with Dolph. I'd rather tag them instead of marking them as
> critical. It is also true that it's not possible to land a patch if
> the gate fails, which means these bugs can be interpreted as critical
> as well. However, I personally don't think we should let the gate mark
> those bugs as critical.
> Would a combination of High + tag - elastic-recheck - make sense?
> With the above it would be easier to triage them, to know where they
> came from and to prioritise them correctly.
Given that they potentially block not only critical bugs from the same
project from being fixed, but
critical bugs from all projects being fixed (and at the very least they
slow the process of fixing them
down), I think it's quite reasonable to mark them as critical.
I think it'd also be useful if there was a convention of manually tagging
the bugs as "gate" (or something
similar) when the submitting ones which were the result of transient
failures. It would make them easier
to find and reduce duplicated bug reports which can hide the apparent
regularity of the bug occurring
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev