| Re: [eigen] questions about Bugzilla workflow |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] questions about Bugzilla workflow
- From: Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 08:19:56 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZB/N74ldQZ8xyl4Rj/fKkmAK4hK8RhW9K+PKxjRKllM=; b=J7KdOE91jhLN2l8fVBwsP+wQ580u868EmNJibGGNWSwyTfHRFAvhGFnnw3rg5BMJrx 6UDl4F08y4sr/1A7nQIoVCk4/R9u7NnoarYnB5p94Ob8UBYQi663uWg6ixw7Z/YN4ykI Q1AgqKG8Zk0WUs1T09jD70Y5tAkxDT+tXhgi4=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Zo5+euqXahfBnaJeaMAR4DTuHWBoVu97t+1NMRBUv8EjsYNzVcpDMDhyy92ckSMxSM YmJqdgw33wzZhUmzm1YSyrlcqdjij7ReFAFBn60OIb5oj1SUZxC+sdsSKjKdeE9rp9Ap N92//AJkolB6wK98X6ViD9ZXKFOQ+2ORQcTy0=
2010/10/16 Gael Guennebaud <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 5:12 AM, Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have 2 questions about how we should be working with Bugzilla:
>>
>> 1. Should there be a "nobody" assignee? Currently, every bug is forced
>> to be assigned to someone. There's a default assignee for each
>> component.
>> - good: this means that no bug is left with nobody caring for it
>> - bad: this wrongly suggests that the assignee said he would fix it,
>> and can send prospective contributors the wrong signal
>>
>> So: should we create a dummy "nobody" account, to whom we could assign
>> bugs that aren't owned by anyone? If yes, should we make that the
>> default assignee for all new bugs, or should we keep our system of
>> assigning new bugs to real people by default, and letting them
>> (re)assign to "nobody" if needed?
>
> indeed, I was not 100% comfortable with automatic default assignees so
> I think that's a good idea.
OK. What's your opinion on the second "if yes..." question I asked?
Default to "nobody" as assignee?
>
>
>> 2. Are "milestones" useful? We have to file tracking bugs for each
>> milestone anyway as that is the only way (AFAIK) of getting certain
>> useful features such as dependency tree/graph. So what's the value of
>> "milestones" compared to setting "blocks:" on the tracking bug?
>
> 1 - with milestones you don't have to remember/search for the respective bug ID
Then it's enough to put a "target milestone" on the tracking bug, no
need to set it on every bug; alternatively, the same result can be
achieved by putting links to the tracking bug where people will
naturally look for it (wiki,etc).
> 2 - with milestones you can have a list of all blocking issues for
> each milestone integrated in a wiki page.
Hm I'm not sure what a milestone gives you here that a tracking bug
doesn't? First, the dependency tree is such a list,
http://eigen.tuxfamily.org/bz/showdependencytree.cgi?id=25&hide_resolved=1
Second, if you were thinking about search results, you can do that
also with just a tracking bug, although you only get the bugs that are
directly blocking, i.e. it doesn't go recursively:
http://eigen.tuxfamily.org/bz/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&field0-0-0=blocked&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&type0-0-0=anywords&value0-0-0=48
To construct this kind of search, under Search click "Advanced Search"
and then at the bottom, "Advanced Searching Using Boolean Charts".
>
> For 1, we could workaround it using aliases. For 2, the dependency
> graph is probably fine too, maybe unless there are too many bugs and
> the graph gets too big, I don't know.
>
> So I would say more or less even, though milestones look slightly easier to me.
>
> gael
>
>> Benoit
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>