[openstack-dev] [all] Scale out bug-triage by making it easier for people to contribute
flavio at redhat.com
Wed Nov 19 07:48:16 UTC 2014
On 18/11/14 14:45 -0800, Joe Gordon wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Clint Byrum <clint at fewbar.com> wrote:
> Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2014-11-17 08:46:19 -0800:
> > Greetings,
> > Regardless of how big/small bugs backlog is for each project, I
> > believe this is a common, annoying and difficult problem. At the oslo
> > meeting today, we're talking about how to address our bug triage
> > process and I proposed something that I've seen done in other
> > communities (rust-language ) that I consider useful and a good
> > option for OpenStack too.
> > The process consist in a bot that sends an email to every *volunteer*
> > with 10 bugs to review/triage for the week. Each volunteer follows the
> > triage standards, applies tags and provides information on whether the
> > bug is still valid or not. The volunteer doesn't have to fix the bug,
> > just triage it.
> > In openstack, we could have a job that does this and then have people
> > from each team volunteer to help with triage. The benefits I see are:
> > * Interested folks don't have to go through the list and filter the
> > bugs they want to triage. The bot should be smart enough to pick the
> > oldest, most critical, etc.
> > * It's a totally opt-in process and volunteers can obviously ignore
> > emails if they don't have time that week.
> > * It helps scaling out the triage process without poking people around
> > and without having to do a "call for volunteers" every meeting/cycle/etc
> > The above doesn't solve the problme completely but just like reviews,
> > it'd be an optional, completely opt-in process that people can sign up
> > for.
> My experience in Ubuntu, where we encouraged non-developers to triage
> bugs, was that non-developers often ask the wrong questions and
> sometimes even harm the process by putting something in the wrong
> priority or state because of a lack of deep understanding.
> Triage in a hospital is done by experienced nurses and doctors working
> together, not "triagers". This is because it may not always be obvious
> to somebody just how important a problem is. We have the same set of
> problems. The most important thing is that developers see it as an
> important task and take part. New volunteers should be getting involved
> at every level, not just bug triage.
>++, nice analogy.
>Another problem I have seen, is we need to constantly re-triage bugs, as just
>because a bug was marked as confirmed 6 months ago doesn't mean it is still
Ideally, the script will take care of this. Bugs that haven't been
update for more than N months will fall into the "to-triage" pool for
> I think the best approach to this, like reviews, is to have a place
> where users can go to drive the triage workload to 0. For instance, the
> ubuntu server team had this report for triage:
> Sadly, it looks like they're overwhelmed or have abandoned the effort
> (I hope this doesn't say something about Ubuntu server itself..), but
> the basic process was to move bugs off these lists. I'm sure if we ask
> nice the author of that code will share it with us and we could adapt
> it for OpenStack projects.
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>OpenStack-dev mailing list
>OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the OpenStack-dev