Open Stack

Cinder bugs list was far more manageable once this had been done.

It is worth sharing the tool for this? I realise it's fairly trivial to
write one, but some standardisation on the comment format etc seems
valuable, particularly for Q/A folks who work between different projects.

On 23 May 2016 at 14:02, Markus Zoeller <mzoeller at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> TL;DR: Automatic closing of 185 bug reports which are older than 18
> months in the week R-13. Skipping specific bug reports is possible. A
> bug report comment explains the reasons.
>
>
> I'd like to get rid of more clutter in our bug list to make it more
> comprehensible by a human being. For this, I'm targeting our ~185 bug
> reports which were reported 18 months ago and still aren't in progress.
> That's around 37% of open bug reports which aren't in progress. This
> post is about *how* and *when* I do it. If you have very strong reasons
> to *not* do it, let me hear them.
>
> When
> ----
> I plan to do it in the week after the non-priority feature freeze.
> That's week R-13, at the beginning of July. Until this date you can
> comment on bug reports so they get spared from this cleanup (see below).
> Beginning from R-13 until R-5 (Newton-3 milestone), we should have
> enough time to gain some overview of the rest.
>
> I also think it makes sense to make this a repeated effort, maybe after
> each milestone/release or monthly or daily.
>
> How
> ---
> The bug reports which will be affected are:
> * in status: [new, confirmed, triaged]
> * AND without assignee
> * AND created at: > 18 months
> A preview of them can be found at [1].
>
> You can spare bug reports if you leave a comment there which says
> one of these (case-sensitive flags):
> * CONFIRMED FOR: NEWTON
> * CONFIRMED FOR: MITAKA
> * CONFIRMED FOR: LIBERTY
>
> The expired bug report will have:
> * status: won't fix
> * assignee: none
> * importance: undecided
> * a new comment which explains *why* this was done
>
> The comment the expired bug reports will get:
>     This is an automated cleanup. This bug report got closed because
>     it is older than 18 months and there is no open code change to
>     fix this. After this time it is unlikely that the circumstances
>     which lead to the observed issue can be reproduced.
>     If you can reproduce it, please:
>     * reopen the bug report
>     * AND leave a comment "CONFIRMED FOR: <RELEASE_NAME>"
>       Only still supported release names are valid.
>       valid example: CONFIRMED FOR: LIBERTY
>       invalid example: CONFIRMED FOR: KILO
>     * AND add the steps to reproduce the issue (if applicable)
>
>
> Let me know if you think this comment gives enough information how to
> handle this situation.
>
>
> References:
> [1] http://45.55.105.55:8082/bugs-dashboard.html#tabExpired
>
> --
> Regards, Markus Zoeller (markus_z)
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>



-- 
-- 
Duncan Thomas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160524/6a002360/attachment.html>