[Sugar-devel] Sugar Labs bug tracker used by the OLPCA team?

[Walter Bender]

On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 3:59 AM, Simon Schampijer <simon at schampijer.de>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> to simplify OLPC-A's [1] ticket workflow we would like to use the SugarLabs
> bug tracker for tickets related to Sugar and for Activities (the hardware
> related issues and the issues of other components like kernel and drivers
> will stay at the OLPC bug tracker [2]). Currently we use mainly the OLPC bug
> tracker to keep track of failures and tasks for our releases. We think that
> it makes sense to have the bug house keeping for Sugar and Activity bugs
> happening at one place to not have duplicated bug reports on different bug
> trackers.
>

+1 (if only because a bug has prevented me from being able to login and
update tickets on dev.l.o for more than a year :P)

>
> We would like to do two things: add a keyword for our release to the
> tickets we are interested in e.g. '11.2.0'. Furthermore, based on the Trac
> ticket workflow [3] we would like to add a new field to the Sugar Labs bug
> tracker: "Action Needed". This helps us to do QA and release management on
> our tickets. We would simplify this a bit to the following states of the
> "Action Needed" field:
>
> (set by developers):
>  reproduce       --  we need to know how to reproduce the issue
>  diagnose        --  diagnose root cause
>  code            --  code a fix.
>  review          --  sent a patch for review
>

+1

>
> (set by module maintainers):
>  package         --  package it up as an RPM, an activity, etc.
>  add to build    --  package needs to be added to a development build
>

+1

>
> (set by release manager):
>  test in build   --  package in the recent build for testing
>

? Which build would a release manager be referring to? (We "support"
multiple builds these days.)

>
> (set by QA):
>  qa signoff      --  has been tested by the QA
>  no action       --  and closed.
>

? In the context of which release would the QA team be working?


> So far, the policy in Sugar Labs has been that a ticket is closed when the
> fix landed in git. As there is no organized QA in Sugar Labs and no direct
> final product that approach works fine and can stay in place. For the
> tickets we touch we would just do those extra steps. We will make sure that
> the tickets get closed though to not leave garbage behind.
>
> Technically the "Action Needed" field is a custom field that can be added
> in the administration panel.
>
> Please let me know what you think about this, if this is a workable
> approach, if there are any downsides with this etc.
>

Except for clarifying the issue of multiple releases, I think this is a
great idea.

-walter


> Regards,
>   Simon
>
> [1] OLPCA are the guys working on images for the different XO hardware,
> currently the development cycle is called 11.2.0
> http://wiki.laptop.org/go/11.2.0/Release_plan
> [2] http://dev.laptop.org/
> [3] http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Trac_ticket_workflow
> _______________________________________________
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>



-- 
Walter Bender
Sugar Labs
http://www.sugarlabs.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20110530/93ed982d/attachment-0001.html>