From Fedora Project Wiki

< BugZappers‎ | Meetings
Revision as of 18:37, 15 August 2015 by Mitzie (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Bug Triage Meeting :: 2009-04-21

Attendees

  • adamw
  • arxs
  • iarlyy
  • poelcat
  • thomasj
  • mcepl
  • comphappy (not really)
  • John5342
  • rishi

Topics of Discussion

  • Triage Metrics - Problems with python have delayed the completion this task. Adamw and comphappy are working towards a solution and will report at the end of the week on the progress. Follow up on next weeks agenda.
  • Blocker Bugs - No updated information at this time. Will be on next weeks agenda.

Unassigned Follow Tasks


IRC Transcript

--- poelcat has changed the topic to: Bug Triage Meeting Apr 21 11:00
poelcat hi everyone, who is here? Apr 21 11:01
* thomasj part Apr 21 11:02
arxs here Apr 21 11:02
adamw hiya Apr 21 11:02
poelcat adamw: have you seen mcepl or tk009? Apr 21 11:04
adamw i woke up approximately 10 seconds ago :) Apr 21 11:04
poelcat adamw: should we cancel the meeting? Apr 21 11:05
adamw um Apr 21 11:06
adamw anyone have anything they think we can usefully talk about with this group? Apr 21 11:06
iarlyy hi all, sorry for delay Apr 21 11:07
adamw hi iarlyy Apr 21 11:07
iarlyy adamw: what are we talking about? Apr 21 11:08
adamw nothing yet Apr 21 11:08
adamw not much turnout Apr 21 11:08
adamw let's see, we could still do the status reports Apr 21 11:08
adamw poelcat: that's your bailliwick I believe Apr 21 11:08
poelcat okay, i'll go through the agenda Apr 21 11:09
poelcat it may be quick Apr 21 11:09
poelcat i created the SOP page (just now :-/) Apr 21 11:09
poelcat need to add the links Apr 21 11:09
poelcat https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/sop Apr 21 11:09
poelcat once I add the link I think that will address agenda item #2 Apr 21 11:09
adamw OK Apr 21 11:10
adamw thanks for that Apr 21 11:10
poelcat unless there was something else that needed to happen Apr 21 11:10
adamw i don't see anything...well, link the sop page from wherever it needs to be linked in the rest of the wiki Apr 21 11:10
poelcat adamw: add a link to the bugzappers front page? Apr 21 11:11
iarlyy I fixed typo "bugzialla" Apr 21 11:12
poelcat iarlyy: thanks :) Apr 21 11:13
poelcat next topic was metrics collection Apr 21 11:13
adamw yeah Apr 21 11:13
poelcat comphappy is still trying to get the server setup Apr 21 11:13
poelcat that is all I know Apr 21 11:13
poelcat anyone else? Apr 21 11:13
adamw comphappy can't be here but he says the problem is he has to port the code to python 2.4 to run on fedora infrastructure Apr 21 11:13
adamw which seems kind of bizarre Apr 21 11:13
adamw i'll try and get in touch with him to get the whole story on that and see if there's anything we can do about it Apr 21 11:14
poelcat adamw: thanks Apr 21 11:14
comphappy Not really here but I will fill in a little Apr 21 11:14
adamw ah hi comphappy, thanks Apr 21 11:15
comphappy I wrote the code for python 2.5 Apr 21 11:15
comphappy But fedora infra is using stuff from them and that is 2.4 Apr 21 11:16
comphappy Make that rhel phone is hard to type from Apr 21 11:16
* iarlyy crying because lost a hd.... :( Apr 21 11:17
comphappy I use a bunch of dict tools that were added ti 2.5 Apr 21 11:17
adamw seems odd that rhel would still be on python 2.4 Apr 21 11:18
comphappy I have meetings all week but iwill fill adamw in this weekend Apr 21 11:18
adamw is there a mailing list thread about this or anything, or did you just ask in irc? Apr 21 11:18
mcepl pip Apr 21 11:18
mcepl sorry for being late Apr 21 11:18
comphappy Irc fedora-admin Apr 21 11:18
iarlyy hi mcepl Apr 21 11:19
adamw comphappy: ok, thanks a lot - i'll catch up with you this weekend Apr 21 11:19
adamw mcepl: hiya Apr 21 11:19
comphappy But I have toget back to my job meting now Apr 21 11:19
mcepl what did I miss Apr 21 11:19
adamw comphappy: go with our blessings ;) Apr 21 11:19
* John5342 arrives late Apr 21 11:19
adamw mcepl: not so much - poelcat's on top of the sop pages, comphappy reported on a roadblock with the metrics stuff Apr 21 11:20
mcepl auch Apr 21 11:20
adamw he wrote it in python 2.5 and apparently infrastructure only has python 2.4 Apr 21 11:20
adamw which seems a bit odd, so i'll do some investigatin' Apr 21 11:20
adamw you know anything about that? Apr 21 11:20
adamw wb poelcat Apr 21 11:20
poelcat thanks, not sure what happened Apr 21 11:21
poelcat lost my whole screen session and everything Apr 21 11:21
mcepl adamw: hmm, if infrastructure runs on RHEL5 (which seems reasonable), then I guess we are limited to 2.4 Apr 21 11:21
adamw yeah, he said it runs on RHEL Apr 21 11:21
adamw i didn't know the latest rhel was still stuck in the python stone age :\ bummer Apr 21 11:22
mcepl remember, RHEL5 is Fedora 6 Apr 21 11:22
mcepl F7 was python 2.5 I believe Apr 21 11:23
adamw ok, so we'll have to see what we can come up with there Apr 21 11:23
adamw poelcat: next on the agenda? Apr 21 11:23
poelcat yes Apr 21 11:23
poelcat next topic was blocker bug discussion Apr 21 11:24
poelcat which i think tied into the conversation QA was having Apr 21 11:24
poelcat about release critiera? Apr 21 11:24
adamw yeah Apr 21 11:25
poelcat any updates? Apr 21 11:26
adamw er, i haven't exactly been thinking along those lines this week, so i'm a bit blank on that right now Apr 21 11:26
poelcat okay Apr 21 11:27
adamw has anyone else got any thoughts there? Apr 21 11:27
rishi I got one issue. Apr 21 11:27
adamw yup? Apr 21 11:28
rishi Ville Skytta had posted a list of packages with broken -debuginfos. I have been filling "high" priority bugs with fixes for them. Are there any plans regarding them? Apr 21 11:28
rishi Most of them are broken for F-9 to F-12. Apr 21 11:28
adamw plans, as in...? Apr 21 11:28
adamw fixing the bugs is kinda outside our scope, heh Apr 21 11:29
rishi adamw: How important are they for the release, etc.. Apr 21 11:29
* poelcat doubts we would hold up a release for debuginfo packages Apr 21 11:30
John5342 debuginfo packages help debugging issues but should not effect end user experience so doubt they are worth holding up release for Apr 21 11:30
rishi Since most of the fixes are trivial, can some provenpackager go through the bugs and commit the fixes? Apr 21 11:31
* rishi is not a provenpackager Apr 21 11:31
adamw and they have no particular impact on the Installation Experience Apr 21 11:31
adamw so post-release updates is fine Apr 21 11:31
adamw rishi: possibly, but that'd be outside our scope Apr 21 11:31
rishi adamw: Ok. Apr 21 11:32
adamw rishi: bugzappers is for weeding bugzilla; when it comes to that kind of thing, you'd need a different group Apr 21 11:32
rishi adamw: Who? :-) fedora-qa? Apr 21 11:32
adamw no, both qa and bugzappers are responsible for identifying and tracking bugs, not fixing them :) Apr 21 11:32
adamw i don't know where's the best place to request something like that, actually Apr 21 11:32
adamw mcepl? poelcat? what would you say? Apr 21 11:32
mcepl rishi: where is the list Apr 21 11:33
mcepl ? Apr 21 11:33
mcepl is there any tracking bug for them? Apr 21 11:33
poelcat seems like a fedora-devel topic to me Apr 21 11:34
iarlyy isn't devel role? Apr 21 11:34
rishi mcepl: A thread on fedora-devel-list. Apr 21 11:34
mcepl make a bug for each package, and tracking bug for all of them and then maybe some provenpackager (like me ;-)) will go through them. Apr 21 11:34
mcepl OK, I will take a look Apr 21 11:34
poelcat next topic Apr 21 11:35
poelcat 5) Wiki Revisions - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/How_to_Triage <http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Beland/Bugzilla_Legend> - revising the draft list of priority / severity criteria. Apr 21 11:35
poelcat i think we are done with the first page? Apr 21 11:35
poelcat the second one depends on the proposal adamw has been getting feedback on Apr 21 11:35
poelcat anything to discuss today? Apr 21 11:35
adamw well, rather the proposal depends on the page Apr 21 11:36
adamw we'll be linking to this page in the proposal Apr 21 11:36
adamw so we want it to be reasonably solid Apr 21 11:36
adamw in particular, jlaska noticed it had some subjective bits Apr 21 11:36
adamw and the "Severity is used to describe how bad a bug is for the reporter" doesn't match up with the recent discussion on test-list Apr 21 11:37
adamw looking at it again, i'd want to tweak that, and the "producing major frustration" line under High Apr 21 11:37
adamw aside from that it looks ok Apr 21 11:37
poelcat makes sense to me Apr 21 11:39
arxs think we should change it like jlaska wrote it Apr 21 11:40
adamw ok, great - i guess i'll go ahead and revise it along those lines today Apr 21 11:40
adamw on that whole topic, btw, i was going to send the mail out to -devel yesterday or today but now i'm waiting on a technical query with the bugzilla maintainer Apr 21 11:40
adamw (on whether it's actually possible to block access to priority / severity) Apr 21 11:40
adamw so that's the status there Apr 21 11:41
arxs is that an option for you to block the prio/serv fields? Apr 21 11:41
adamw that's the question - whether we can block access to those fields to all except maintainers / zappers Apr 21 11:42
arxs or to hide it from the reporter? Apr 21 11:42
adamw well, both, but the first is most important Apr 21 11:42
adamw the second is mostly useful to prevent people being annoyed about the first =) Apr 21 11:44
arxs that's right :) Apr 21 11:44
mcepl adamw: I just wrote extensive comment on the test list about severity Apr 21 11:45
adamw i didn't read that yet :\ Apr 21 11:45
arxs uh? i must missed it Apr 21 11:45
mcepl adamw: I just sent it (just a notice, that I expect continuous flamewar on replies to what I wrote) Apr 21 11:45
adamw oh good, life was getting a bit dull around here Apr 21 11:46
adamw i shall warm up the flamethrower Apr 21 11:46
mcepl (my experience as SAP's lawyer come to play here; I know a little bit about severity) Apr 21 11:46
mcepl and yes, it should be open only to maintainers/bugzappers, or maybe reporter should have it available on the bug reporting initial form, but that's the last time they see it. Apr 21 11:47
mcepl s/see/can touch/ Apr 21 11:47
arxs sounds good, what's about the voting option? Apr 21 11:48
adamw i don't think we need to worry about it too much at this point - we can leave it there, it doesn't hurt anything Apr 21 11:48
arxs to give the "users" or reports a change to show up there interest? Apr 21 11:48
adamw we can think about what to do with the data Apr 21 11:48
mcepl voting is nice but just as a reminder ... it should never be automatically translated into changes of severity/priority Apr 21 11:48
adamw if anyone has any ideas Apr 21 11:48
arxs :mcepl, i fully agree you Apr 21 11:49
mcepl if there is a low/low bug with 2000 votes, then we should reconsider, but that's it Apr 21 11:49
arxs :mcpel right, i think the same about Apr 21 11:49
mcepl (we or maintainers, of course) Apr 21 11:50
mcepl and yes, jlaska is right ... there are two tasks here ... redefining priority/severity and then how to use it. Apr 21 11:52
poelcat last topic was https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/Components_and_Triagers Apr 21 11:52
poelcat the manual metrics are stale Apr 21 11:52
poelcat i propose we remove them Apr 21 11:52
adamw fine by me Apr 21 11:52
arxs sounds good Apr 21 11:53
poelcat was someone committed to maintaining them? Apr 21 11:53
mcepl +1 Apr 21 11:53
iarlyy +1 Apr 21 11:53
poelcat any other topics for today or to discuss next week? Apr 21 11:54
mcepl not for me, 2B continued in #fedora-bugzappers about severity/priority Apr 21 11:56
adamw right Apr 21 11:56
adamw remember, triage day starts now Apr 21 11:56
adamw we had a few new guys sign up this week so they may show up Apr 21 11:56
poelcat adamw: thanks for handling all that! Apr 21 11:56
adamw no problems Apr 21 11:56
poelcat thanks for coming everyone! Apr 21 11:57
poelcat <EOM> Apr 21 11:57

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!

Retrieved from "https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=BugZappers/Meetings/Minutes-2009-Apr-21&oldid=420229"