I just added 3a and 3b. The comments will appear to be coming from me. That is a misconfiguration that I have now fixed. In the future they will come from the "Beam Jira Bot". There were 1119 stale-assigned issues.
Kenn On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 1:41 PM Kenneth Knowles <[email protected]> wrote: > Based on the mild consensus and my availability, I just did #1. I have not > done any others. It seems #2 may be infeasible [1] and I am convinced that > we should not auto-close. I'll update again in a bit... > > Kenn > > [1] https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JRACLOUD-28064 > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 2:54 PM Ahmet Altay <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 for the automations. I agree with concerns related to #4. Auto closing >> issues is not a good experience. A person goes through the work of >> reporting an issue. This might very well be their first contribution. >> Automatically closing these issues with no human comments might make the >> reporter feel ignored. Auto-lowering the priority is a good suggestion. >> >> I wonder if we can also do a spring cleaning up reviewing jira >> components/their default owners. If we can break the jira into more >> components, we could have more people as component owners, triaging smaller >> per-component backlogs. >> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:17 AM Tyson Hamilton <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> +1 for automation. >>> >>> Regarding #4, what about adding the constraint that this rule only >>> applies to issues that are incomplete and require more information from the >>> reporter? >>> >>> Unfortunately it would require a human to triage issues to determine >>> this and apply an appropriate label. Triage should happen regularly >>> anyways, ideally even periodically for old issues, though this may be >>> asking a bit too much. >>> >> >> Even with automation, manual triaging would be a valuable action. If the >> automation can reduce the backlog for manual reviewers, doing manual triage >> would be easier to do, incremental work. >> >> >>> >>> Regarding #5 & #6, having some SLO for P0/P1 issues for both updates and >>> closures would be helpful in setting expectations. A daily P0 violation >>> email to dev@ sounds right, for P1 weekly. What would the Slack >>> notification look like? It would be neat if it could ping the assignee >>> directly. What group would be victims for the auto-assigner? >>> >> >> I agree with this. Email, or a dashboard would work equally well. (We >> need to first agree on SLOs though.) >> >> >> >>> >>> On 2020/04/29 17:15:48, Brian Hulette <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > Agree I think this all sounds good except for 4. >>> > >>> > I like the idea of using automation to help tame the backlog of jiras, >>> but >>> > I worry that 4 could lead to a bad experience for users. Say they file >>> a >>> > jira and maybe get it assigned, and then watch as it bounces all the >>> way >>> > down to closed as obsolete because it was ignored. >>> > The status quo (the bug just gets ignored anyway) isn't great, but at >>> least >>> > the user doesn't have automation working against them. >>> > >>> > Is there something else we can do to make sure these bugs get >>> attention? >>> > >>> > Brian >>> > >>> > >>> > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:00 AM Robert Bradshaw <[email protected]> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > +1 to more automation. >>> > > >>> > > I'm in favor of all but 4, I think it's quite common for issues to be >>> > > noticed but not worked on for 60+ days. Most of the time when a >>> developer >>> > > files an issue they either (1) are working on it right now or (2) are >>> > > filing it away because it's something they're not working on, but >>> should >>> > > get fixed. (Case in point, beginner issues that are not urgent but >>> nice to >>> > > have.) What we could do however is lower the priority after a set >>> amount of >>> > > time. (I suppose issues are a mix of blockers and backlog, and the >>> two >>> > > have very different characteristics.) >>> > > >>> > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 9:38 AM Kenneth Knowles <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > > >>> > >> Hi all, >>> > >> >>> > >> A while ago [1], we discussed using "Automation for Jira" to improve >>> > >> triage and backlog processing (I spend a lot of my time on this). >>> Due to >>> > >> some friction [2] [3] back then, I did not finish it. >>> > >> >>> > >> Now, I just happened to check and I do have the ability to create >>> rules >>> > >> directly. That's convenient! >>> > >> >>> > >> So I want to re-propose some of the ideas that Ismaël had, slightly >>> > >> modified, along with some other ideas I have from my experience >>> doing a lot >>> > >> of Jira handling. I will say it in specific rule form: >>> > >> >>> > >> 1. When issue created: if assignee == creator then mark Open >>> (already >>> > >> Triaged), because someone is probably just filing a bug tracking >>> work they >>> > >> already started. >>> > >> >>> > >> 2. When issue linked to PR: mark it Open (already Triaged). *The >>> triggers >>> > >> should exist but seem to be missing. >>> > >> >>> > >> 3a. When assigned issue has no update in 30 days, add >>> "stale-assigned" >>> > >> label >>> > >> 3b. When issue with "stale-assigned" label has no update in 7 days, >>> > >> unassign >>> > >> >>> > >> 4a. When unassigned issue has no update in 60 days, add "stale" >>> label >>> > >> 4b. When issue with "stale" label has no update in 14 days, close as >>> > >> Obsolete >>> > >> >>> > >> And I think we can also use this to improve visibility and >>> understanding >>> > >> of expectation of high priority issues, per >>> > >> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/jira-priorities/ >>> > >> >>> > >> 5. Some kind of daily alert for P0 "Blocker" issues, because these >>> are >>> > >> outages. The community is being blocked *right now* so it should >>> have dev@ >>> > >> visibility and at least daily updates (probably more). Options >>> include dev@ >>> > >> email, Slack notification, etc. >>> > >> >>> > >> 6. Some kind of alert or auto-assign for P1 "Critical" issues, >>> because >>> > >> these aren't an outage but they would hinder a release. >>> > >> >>> > >> And, finally, they can also automate some aspects of release >>> busywork: >>> > >> >>> > >> 7. When a version is released, it can create the n+2 version. >>> Example: >>> > >> when 2.20.0 is being released, we already have 2.21.0 and move >>> issues to >>> > >> it. When 2.20.0 is finalized, create 2.22.0 so it is ready to have >>> issues >>> > >> moved to it. >>> > >> >>> > >> 8. We could have an automatic comment on bugs filed at P0 or P1 or >>> with >>> > >> Fix Version set to explain the special community awareness that >>> they imply. >>> > >> >>> > >> What do you think of each of these rules? Especially if you have >>> ideas of >>> > >> how to finish the ones that I left as just ideas. >>> > >> >>> > >> Kenn >>> > >> >>> > >> [1] >>> > >> >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/125851639b2f5c2ee55a9eb6b27cf07adee48e2d2a4e5157609b3132%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>> > >> [2] >>> > >> >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ff221c1de7163ef073494cb8873a523ef9f487d7275ec8ae41e91f23%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>> > >> [3] >>> > >> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-17756?focusedCommentId=16790143&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-16790143 >>> > >> >>> > > >>> > >>> >>
