Open Stack

On 8/2/2018 10:59 AM, Radomir Dopieralski wrote:
> To be honest, I don't see much point in automatically creating bugs 
> that nobody is going to look at. When you implement a new feature, 
> it's up to you to make it available in Horizon and CLI and wherever 
> else, since the people working there simply don't have the time to 
> work on it. Creating a ticket will not magically make someone do that 
> work for you. We are happy to assist with this, but that's it. 
> Anything else is going to get added whenever someone has any free 
> cycles, or it becomes necessary for some reason (like breaking 
> compatibility). That's the current reality, and no automation is going 
> to help with it.
>
I disagree with this view.  In the past there have been companies that 
have had people working on Horizon to keep it implemented for their 
purposes.  Have these bugs available would have made their work easier.  
I also know that there are people on the OSC team that just work on 
keeping functions implemented and up to date.

At a minimum, having these bugs automatically opened would help when 
someone is trying to figure out why the new function they are looking 
for is not available in OSC or Horizon.  A search would turn up the fact 
that it hasn't been implemented yet.  Currently, we frequently have the 
discussion 'Has that been implemented in Horizon yet?'  This would 
reduce the confusion around that subject.

So, I support trying to make this happen as I feel it moves us towards a 
better UX for OpenStack.

> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 5:09 PM Sean McGinnis <sean.mcginnis at gmx.com 
> <mailto:sean.mcginnis at gmx.com>> wrote:
>
>     I'm wondering if someone on the infra team can give me some
>     pointers on how to
>     approach something, and looking for any general feedback as well.
>
>     Background
>     ==========
>     We've had things like the DocImpact tag that could be added to
>     commit messages
>     that would tie into some automation to create a launchpad bug when
>     that commit
>     merged. While we had a larger docs team and out-of-tree docs, I
>     think this
>     really helped us make sure we didn't lose track of needed
>     documentation
>     updates.
>
>     I was able to find part of how that is implemented in jeepyb:
>
>     http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/jeepyb/tree/jeepyb/cmd/notify_impact.py
>
>     Current Challenge
>     =================
>     Similar to the need to follow up with documentation, I've seen a
>     lot of cases
>     where projects have added features or made other changes that
>     impact downstream
>     consumers of that project. Most often, I've seen cases where
>     something like
>     python-cinderclient adds some functionality, but it is on projects
>     like Horizon
>     or python-openstackclient to proactively go out and discover those
>     changes.
>
>     Not only just seeking out those changes, but also evaluating
>     whether a given
>     change should have any impact on their project. So we've ended up
>     in a lot of
>     cases where either new functionality isn't made available through
>     these
>     interfaces until a cycle or two later, or probably worse, cases
>     where something
>     is now broken with no one aware of it until an actual end user
>     hits a problem
>     and files a bug.
>
>     ClientImpact Plan
>     =================
>     I've run this by a few people and it seems to have some support.
>     Or course I'm
>     open to any other suggestions.
>
>     What I would like to do is add a ClientImpact tag handling that
>     could be added
>     very similarly to DocImpact. The way I see it working is it would
>     work in much
>     the same way where project's can use this to add the tag to a
>     commit message
>     when they know it is something that will require additional work
>     in OSC or
>     Horizon (or others). Then when that commit merges, automation
>     would create a
>     launchpad bug and/or Storyboard story, including a default set of
>     client
>     projects. Perhaps we can find some way to make those impacted clients
>     configurable by source project, but that could be a follow-on
>     optimization.
>
>     I am concerned that this could create some extra overhead for
>     these projects.
>     But my hope is it would be a quick evaluation by a bug triager in
>     those
>     projects where they can, hopefully, quickly determine if a change
>     does not in
>     fact impact them and just close the ones they don't think require
>     any follow on
>     work.
>
>     I do hope that this will save some time and speed things up
>     overall for these
>     projects to be notified that there is something that needs their
>     attention
>     without needing someone to take the time to actively go out and
>     discover that.
>
>     Help Needed
>     ===========
>     From the bits I've found for the DocImpact handling, it looks like
>     it should
>     not be too much effort to implement the logic to handle a
>     ClientImpact flag.
>     But I have not been able to find all the moving parts that work
>     together to
>     perform that automation.
>
>     If anyone has any background knowledge on how DocImpact is
>     implemented and can
>     give me a few pointers, I think I should be able to take it from
>     there to get
>     this implemented. Or if there is someone that knows this well and
>     is interested
>     in working on some of the implementation, that would be very
>     welcome too!
>
>     Sean
>
>     __________________________________________________________________________
>     OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>     Unsubscribe:
>     OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>     <http://OpenStack-dev-request@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-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/20180802/b06f2064/attachment.html>