I definitely like the idea of auto-updating tickets in this way. I'm
not keen on auto-closing tickets, but if we bump a ticket (like, with a
"please try the new release" message) and there's no response in N
weeks, then it may make sense to do this. We have a lot of cases of
people posting to ask.openstack and simultaneously opening a ticket, and
it's not clear, from following both, which one they're actually tracking.
--Rich
On 01/09/2014 06:48 AM, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:
We're (pbrady, mrunge, me) having this discussion on IRC, just
wanted to
post it to wider audience who're asleep/just waking up.
I was thinking (in future) if it makes sense to mass update RDO bugs
with stock responses (like please try w/ blah version, etc) when we move
from one version to another (e.g. how Fedora does) to humanly keep
up2date with stale bugs, unresponsive reporters, etc.
Points of view (slightly edited for readability)
--------------
- mrunge: "I like the idea on auto-updating or closing bugs. It's not
ideal, but helps to reduce the number of bugs, which were forgotten
for whatever reason."
- pbrady: "kashyap, I think your suggestion of more
involved RDO/Fedora bug triage would obviate the need for that.
We kinda got that (auto-updating) automatically when the bugs were
in Fedora bugzilla, and since openstack release cadence matched
Fedora's. But with the move to separate RDO product
(in bugzilla, i.e.) and with the diverging OpenStack
and Fedora release cadence, a similar separate mechanism
would be useful
Re: non openstack project bugs, I suppose fortnightly we could do
half the "packaging" call on #rdo to triage distro bugs"
Any other constructive opinions?
mrunge, pbrady: Don't hesitate to yell if I misrepresented your comments.
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen(a)redhat.com
OpenStack Community Liaison
http://openstack.redhat.com/