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

[Rafael Ortiz]

On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Simon Schampijer <simon at schampijer.de>wrote:
>
>> On 05/30/2011 02:32 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
>>
>>> 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)
>>>
>>
>> Often things sort out by themselves!
>>
>>
>>
>>>> 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.)
>>>
>>
>> Ok, I guess that has not been clear enough. The "Action needed" field
>> would be only used by the OLPCA team. The release manager would be here the
>> release manager for the OLPCA release. At the moment Daniel for the 11.2.0
>> release. Of course we could try to generalize this a bit more but I think
>> this will get tricky quickly. To help making the distinction a bit better we
>> could label the field as well "Action needed (OLPC)" or similar.
>>
>>
>>  (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?
>>>
>>
>> Same here. This would be Sam triaging the bugs accordingly.
>>
>>  [...]
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Except for clarifying the issue of multiple releases, I think this is a
>>> great idea.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for commenting and helping me to explain, hopefully, a bit clearer,
>>   Simon
>>
>
> Makes even more sense now.
>
> I wonder if there is some way (automated perhaps) to migrate the open
> Sugar-related tickets on d.l.o to b.sl.o?
>
> -walter
>
> Although, I really like this QA workflow, I'm not sure
if this will prevent people from the community to follow the workflow, e.g
an ''outsider'' or an activity developer that wants to close a bug or do
follow-ups that require a change of state on the workflow. For starters
there should be a wiki page where to document this in order to point people
to the process.

In my opinion this could be yet another wall to enter sugar development.




> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20110530/c6d42f7b/attachment.html>