I have now added modified 4: 4a. labeling stale-P2 for unassigned 60 day old jiras 4b. after 14 days downgrading stale-P2 labeled jiras to P3
On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 9:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> wrote: > 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 <k...@apache.org> 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 <al...@google.com> 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 <tyso...@google.com> >>> 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 <bhule...@google.com> 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 <rober...@google.com >>>> > >>>> > 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 <k...@apache.org> >>>> 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 >>>> > >> >>>> > > >>>> > >>>> >>>
