Open Stack

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 1:34 AM, Duncan Thomas <duncan.thomas at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 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.
>
​consistency sure seems like a nice thing to me.​


>
> 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
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160524/d85850f9/attachment.html>