Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2012-02-07 Thread Andre Klapper
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 22:44 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
 After having to send in another code freeze break request e-mail, I
 realised that the process is problematic. Apart from the release team
 and the patch sender, nobody else knows about the freeze break request,
 or about the status of the request.


After having talked to Olav Vitters at FOSDEM I (or we?) would like to
propose using Bugzilla flags for freeze break requests in GNOME 3.5.
Personally I consider keywords too cumbersome plus too easy to forget.

Please also read Olav's initial comments on this thread again:
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2011-September/msg00147.html

This proposal applies to those Bugzilla products which already have a
GNOME Target field (based on their Bugzilla classification / GNOME
moduleset).

Flags are displayed in Bugzilla as a dropdown menu.
The following statuses can be possible:
* (flag never requested)
*  ?  (requested)
*  -  (rejected)
*  +  (approved)

Flags can be queried for, however it's better if an email is
automatically sent to affected parties whenever a request flag has been
set (Olav said he'd investigate once some more Bugzilla maintenance work
has been done, hence targetting GNOME 3.5 instead of 3.3). 
Doing this via pseudo accounts (like string-freeze-br...@gnome.bugs)
would allow non-affected but interested parties (like distributions) to
also receive notifications via their Bugzilla users watchlist.


https://live.gnome.org/ThreePointThree#Schedule lists:

| Development Stage  | To decide | To notify
++---+--
| UI Freeze  | 2x rel-team   | gnome-doc
| API/ABI Freeze | 2x rel-team   | ---
| String Change Announce | ---   | gnome-i18n, gnome-doc
| String Freeze  | 2x gnome-i18n | rel-team, gnome-doc
| Hard Code Freeze   | 2x rel-team   | ---

Initially I favored having three flags (r-t, doc, i18n) but that leaves
us with the problem how to implement the notifications.
Hence I propose five flags.

IIRC flags can either refer to reports or attachments. For code changes
a patch to review is needed, however trivial changes could easily be
committed without having the hassle to attach a patch first. Undecided.

In case a comment can automatically be added to the bug report when a
request flag is set (Olav should know), the comment could include
reasons for receiving that bugmail (team X to decide; team Y only
notified) and expectations (2 members of team X to add Yes/No comments
to the bug report, 2nd member with Yes comment must set requested flag
to approved).


andre
-- 
mailto:ak...@gmx.net | failed
http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper

___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-23 Thread Olav Vitters
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:44:32PM +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
 I think that, at the very least for GNOME 3.4 onwards, we should switch
 to using a keyword in bugzilla, and the release-team, docs team and i18n
 teams can monitor newly request breaks, through RSS feeds (the design
 team does that), and get the keywords cleared when the freeze break has
 a result.

The Bugzilla way of doing this is to use flags. A flag is either defined
for attachments _or_ (not and) bugs. This is possible on our currently
bugzilla; we just do not use them.

For flags you could have e.g.
code_freeze_break flag
string_freeze_break flag
ui_freeze_break flag
or perhaps just freeze_break (bit easier IMO)

Flags can have 3 things:
 ?   request it to be set
 -   request denied
 +   request approved

Then there are settings to control:
* who can request
* who can approve/deny
* who should be cc'ed on the request (release-team, etc)

Drawbacks:
* IMO UI is complicated and Bugzilla is slower than just email
* I think only the request gets CC'ed to release-team. None of the
  following comments will be (AFAIK.. could be wrong)
  that would be pretty annoying
* it is either + or -.. nothing about needing two approvals. Can be
  solved by using comments though (1st person says +1 in a comment;
  second sets the '+' on the flag).

Flags have a lot of options, so above is my idea about how it should be
used. Some of the stuff is IMO just confusing.
-- 
Regards,
Olav
___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-23 Thread Baptiste Mille-Mathias
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
 On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:44:32PM +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
 I think that, at the very least for GNOME 3.4 onwards, we should switch
 to using a keyword in bugzilla, and the release-team, docs team and i18n
 teams can monitor newly request breaks, through RSS feeds (the design
 team does that), and get the keywords cleared when the freeze break has
 a result.

 The Bugzilla way of doing this is to use flags. A flag is either defined
 for attachments _or_ (not and) bugs. This is possible on our currently
 bugzilla; we just do not use them.

 For flags you could have e.g.
 code_freeze_break flag
 string_freeze_break flag
 ui_freeze_break flag
 or perhaps just freeze_break (bit easier IMO)

 Flags can have 3 things:
  ?   request it to be set
  -   request denied
  +   request approved

 Then there are settings to control:
 * who can request
 * who can approve/deny
 * who should be cc'ed on the request (release-team, etc)

 Drawbacks:
 * IMO UI is complicated and Bugzilla is slower than just email
 * I think only the request gets CC'ed to release-team. None of the
  following comments will be (AFAIK.. could be wrong)
  that would be pretty annoying
 * it is either + or -.. nothing about needing two approvals. Can be
  solved by using comments though (1st person says +1 in a comment;
  second sets the '+' on the flag).

 Flags have a lot of options, so above is my idea about how it should be
 used. Some of the stuff is IMO just confusing.

As Bastien reported it is also hard to know we're currently on string
freeze period; would be possible to have some banner information
displayed in bugzilla for official modules during freeze stating the
current restriction ?

Regards

-- 
Baptiste Mille-Mathias
Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés
[w] http://damnpeople.fr
___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-23 Thread Jorge González
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 09:53, Baptiste Mille-Mathias
baptiste.millemath...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
 On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:44:32PM +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
 I think that, at the very least for GNOME 3.4 onwards, we should switch
 to using a keyword in bugzilla, and the release-team, docs team and i18n
 teams can monitor newly request breaks, through RSS feeds (the design
 team does that), and get the keywords cleared when the freeze break has
 a result.

 The Bugzilla way of doing this is to use flags. A flag is either defined
 for attachments _or_ (not and) bugs. This is possible on our currently
 bugzilla; we just do not use them.

 For flags you could have e.g.
 code_freeze_break flag
 string_freeze_break flag
 ui_freeze_break flag
 or perhaps just freeze_break (bit easier IMO)

 Flags can have 3 things:
  ?   request it to be set
  -   request denied
  +   request approved

 Then there are settings to control:
 * who can request
 * who can approve/deny
 * who should be cc'ed on the request (release-team, etc)

 Drawbacks:
 * IMO UI is complicated and Bugzilla is slower than just email
 * I think only the request gets CC'ed to release-team. None of the
  following comments will be (AFAIK.. could be wrong)
  that would be pretty annoying
 * it is either + or -.. nothing about needing two approvals. Can be
  solved by using comments though (1st person says +1 in a comment;
  second sets the '+' on the flag).

 Flags have a lot of options, so above is my idea about how it should be
 used. Some of the stuff is IMO just confusing.

 As Bastien reported it is also hard to know we're currently on string
 freeze period; would be possible to have some banner information
 displayed in bugzilla for official modules during freeze stating the
 current restriction ?
There could be a shared calendar. I have my own to know when we
release and when are we in string freeze and such. It's very easy.


 Regards

Regards.

 --
 Baptiste Mille-Mathias
 Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés
 [w] http://damnpeople.fr
 ___
 gnome-i18n mailing list
 gnome-i18n@gnome.org
 http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n




-- 
Jorge González González alor...@gmail.com
Weblog: http://aloriel.no-ip.org
Fotolog: http://www.flickr.com/photos/aloriel
___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-23 Thread Olav Vitters
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 10:11:13AM +0200, Jorge González wrote:
 There could be a shared calendar. I have my own to know when we
 release and when are we in string freeze and such. It's very easy.

http://www.gnome.org/start/unstable/schedule.ics
webcal://www.gnome.org/start/unstable/schedule.ics

it is mentioned on the wiki, as well as:
http://www.gnome.org/start/unstable (which links to the current wiki
page). It is generated by our schedule scripts (see
releng/tools/schedule), then uploaded manually.

We send out the freezes to devel-announce-list as well. Bugzilla would
be manual. I like the idea, but fear we'd not keep it up to date.
-- 
Regards,
Olav
___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-23 Thread F Wolff

Op Vr, 2011-09-23 om 10:11 +0200 skryf Jorge González:
 On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 09:53, Baptiste Mille-Mathias
 baptiste.millemath...@gmail.com wrote:
  On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
  On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:44:32PM +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:

...

  As Bastien reported it is also hard to know we're currently on string
  freeze period; would be possible to have some banner information
  displayed in bugzilla for official modules during freeze stating the
  current restriction ?

I think any way to improve the visibility of the freezes will help. Also
showing information about upcoming freezes can help to prepare people
for them and maybe avoid some freeze breaks before they are necessary.

 There could be a shared calendar. I have my own to know when we
 release and when are we in string freeze and such. It's very easy.

Indeed!
webcal://www.gnome.org/start/unstable/schedule.ics

I think André Klapper maintains this one.

Friedel

--
Recently on my blog:
http://translate.org.za/blogs/friedel/en/content/virtaal-070-released

___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-23 Thread Ross Burton
On 23 September 2011 08:40, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
 The Bugzilla way of doing this is to use flags. A flag is either defined
 for attachments _or_ (not and) bugs. This is possible on our currently
 bugzilla; we just do not use them.

For what it's worth this is exactly what we do in MeeGo for
distribution freezes and we find it works very well.

Ross
___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-23 Thread Olav Vitters
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 09:57:15AM +0100, Ross Burton wrote:
 On 23 September 2011 08:40, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
  The Bugzilla way of doing this is to use flags. A flag is either defined
  for attachments _or_ (not and) bugs. This is possible on our currently
  bugzilla; we just do not use them.
 
 For what it's worth this is exactly what we do in MeeGo for
 distribution freezes and we find it works very well.

Do you have multiple freezes? Do you use one flag or multiple? How do
you handle multiple teams and e.g. one flag?

My idea would be:
* 1 flag, freeze_break
* 3 teams having access to grant/deny (i18n+docs+r/t)
  with a limited amount of people we'd just rely on awareness instead of
  technical solutions. E.g. i18n team should not mark a break as
  'approved' if we're in hard code freeze
* only people marked as developers being able to request (simply to avoid
  confusing random users with a flag option)

Could also have 3 flags:
- UI - i18n+docs
- feature - i18n+docs+r-t
- string - i18n+docs
- code - r-t

then you'd just request the flags that are needed depending on the time.
Big drawback that I think it would be confusing.

Oh, and Bugzilla should just CC the flag CC list on the bug.

Lastly, if you don't have access to Bugzilla, then sending an email
reply should be enough as well (e.g. approved from docs, r-t please
change flag).

-- 
Regards,
Olav
___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-23 Thread Ross Burton
On 23 September 2011 10:58, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
 For what it's worth this is exactly what we do in MeeGo for
 distribution freezes and we find it works very well.

 Do you have multiple freezes? Do you use one flag or multiple? How do
 you handle multiple teams and e.g. one flag?

We have a single freeze which does make things easier.  There is a
group of people who can approve the flag, they all have rights to it
and we rely on clue so e.g. the netbook approver doesn't approve
tablet requests.

 My idea would be:
 * 1 flag, freeze_break
 * 3 teams having access to grant/deny (i18n+docs+r/t)
  with a limited amount of people we'd just rely on awareness instead of
  technical solutions. E.g. i18n team should not mark a break as
  'approved' if we're in hard code freeze
 * only people marked as developers being able to request (simply to avoid
  confusing random users with a flag option)

Agreed that this alternative would be more sensible than presenting
multiple flags.  If you require that people explain what their change
does so the approvers understand what freezes are being broken, then
it should become automatically peer reviewed if say the i18n team
approved a code change.

Ross
___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-23 Thread Bastien Nocera
On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 09:40 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
 On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:44:32PM +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
  I think that, at the very least for GNOME 3.4 onwards, we should switch
  to using a keyword in bugzilla, and the release-team, docs team and i18n
  teams can monitor newly request breaks, through RSS feeds (the design
  team does that), and get the keywords cleared when the freeze break has
  a result.
 
 The Bugzilla way of doing this is to use flags. A flag is either defined
 for attachments _or_ (not and) bugs. This is possible on our currently
 bugzilla; we just do not use them.

I specifically didn't want to use flags because I know that they're too
heavy duty for our uses, and I've had more than enough experience of
them through the Red Hat Bugzilla.

Here's the workflow with a keyword:
1. Developer adds a patch to an important bug, and realises that the
patch needs to make it to stable during a freeze (possibly through a
banner, auto-updated via ical)
2. Developer adds freeze-break keyword
3. Bug shows up on release-team, docs-team, etc.'s RSS feeds, or
hand-made search requests
4. First person from affected teams goes to check it out. If the patch
isn't relevant, drop keyword, disappears from 3., if not, adds mention
1/2!
5. 2/2!
6. r-t member removes keyword

Use human brains to make sense of it. The only thing the developer needs
to know is the keyword to add. The release team knows the rest.

Cheers

___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-23 Thread Olav Vitters
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 12:51:04PM +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
 Here's the workflow with a keyword:
 1. Developer adds a patch to an important bug, and realises that the
 patch needs to make it to stable during a freeze (possibly through a
 banner, auto-updated via ical)
 2. Developer adds freeze-break keyword
 3. Bug shows up on release-team, docs-team, etc.'s RSS feeds, or
 hand-made search requests
 4. First person from affected teams goes to check it out. If the patch
 isn't relevant, drop keyword, disappears from 3., if not, adds mention
 1/2!
 5. 2/2!
 6. r-t member removes keyword
 
 Use human brains to make sense of it. The only thing the developer needs
 to know is the keyword to add. The release team knows the rest.

I think that will add too much burden on the people who have to approve?

I don't track RSS at all. Release-team gets a lot of freeze breaks and I
want to be notified immediately, not after a delay. I need to see the
comments that other teams make immediately as well as they're generally
quite useful. RSS doesn't do that.

IMO for convenience for r-t, Bugzilla annoyance and developers, flags is
best of all the options.

If we limit flags ability to just being able to set a ? or nothing at
all, I think it would be pretty similar to keywords right?

I'll see if I can setup a flag thingy limited to you/limited set of
people just to try it out.
-- 
Regards,
Olav
___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-23 Thread Dan Winship
On 09/23/2011 07:58 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
 I think that will add too much burden on the people who have to approve?
 
 I don't track RSS at all. Release-team gets a lot of freeze breaks and I
 want to be notified immediately, not after a delay. I need to see the
 comments that other teams make immediately as well as they're generally
 quite useful. RSS doesn't do that.

Instead of keywords, we could just add bugzilla pseudo accounts for
string-freeze-br...@gnome.bugs, ui-freeze-br...@gnome.bugs,
code-freeze-br...@gnome.bugs. Then to request a break, just cc: the
appropriate address on the bug along with a comment explaining why.
Release/docs/i18n team members would just watch the appropriate address
and so automatically get cc:ed on all the appropriate bugs.

-- Dan

___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-23 Thread Shaun McCance
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 21:24 -0400, Shaun McCance wrote:
 On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 22:44 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
  I think that, at the very least for GNOME 3.4 onwards, we should switch
  to using a keyword in bugzilla, and the release-team, docs team and i18n
  teams can monitor newly request breaks, through RSS feeds (the design
  team does that), and get the keywords cleared when the freeze break has
  a result.
 
 If I don't get email notifications, I can pretty much guarantee I won't
 deal with it promptly. I don't think you can subscribe to keywords in
 Bugzilla to get emails when bugs are tagged.
 
 I understand we'd get better tracking, but using Bugzilla is a lot more
 work than sending an email. I gave a docs ack for one UI freeze break
 request while on vacation from my phone. Using Bugzilla on a phone is
 unpleasant.
 
 Bugzilla is great for making sure stuff doesn't get lost. Do we have
 a real problem of requests getting lost?

Sorry, slight thread hijack, but related. What we do actually have a
problem with is not getting notifications for things. I just wasted
an hour because I was still testing against 3.1.91 and didn't get a
notification for this:

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=649452

That affects three pages in the help. It was made after the UI freeze,
and well after the UI change announcement period. The reason we have
these things is so that people can start writing about the unstable
releases and not have to worry about being wrong.

I don't mean to pick on you personally, Bastien. It's pretty obvious
what a string change is, but I think a lot of developers don't have
a clear sense of what a UI change is.

So, if we use Bugzilla for this stuff:

1) How do pre-freeze notifications fit in? Add the keyword or flag
but don't wait for approval?

2) How can we improve developer awareness of UI changes? The banner
at the top of Bugzilla could help:

  We're in the UI change announcement period. Does this affect
  the UI or interaction in any way? If so, ...

But I'd still really love to see emails going to gnome-doc-list.

--
Shaun





___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-23 Thread Johannes Schmid
Hi!

 Instead of keywords, we could just add bugzilla pseudo accounts for
 string-freeze-br...@gnome.bugs, ui-freeze-br...@gnome.bugs,
 code-freeze-br...@gnome.bugs. Then to request a break, just cc: the
 appropriate address on the bug along with a comment explaining why.
 Release/docs/i18n team members would just watch the appropriate address
 and so automatically get cc:ed on all the appropriate bugs.

If we do that I would definitly suggest not to add individual people but
the appropriate mailing list to those pseudo accounts. Especially for
string freeze it is often really good to have more people looking at the
added string because you will never know if any language might have
difficulties with a phrase for one or the other reason.

And it would keep things mostly the same from an approver POV as you
would be notified and would get all feedback by bugmail.

Regards,
Johannes

___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-22 Thread Bastien Nocera
Heya,

After having to send in another code freeze break request e-mail, I
realised that the process is problematic. Apart from the release team
and the patch sender, nobody else knows about the freeze break request,
or about the status of the request.

I think that, at the very least for GNOME 3.4 onwards, we should switch
to using a keyword in bugzilla, and the release-team, docs team and i18n
teams can monitor newly request breaks, through RSS feeds (the design
team does that), and get the keywords cleared when the freeze break has
a result.

That means that there's no problems with the timeline (patches that go
in before the request got accepted for example), accountability and
traceability, as well as visibility for the bugsquad and QA teams in
downstream communities.

Opinions?

Cheers

___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-22 Thread Bastien Nocera
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 22:44 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
 Heya,
 
 After having to send in another code freeze break request e-mail, I
 realised that the process is problematic. Apart from the release team
 and the patch sender, nobody else knows about the freeze break request,
 or about the status of the request.
 
 I think that, at the very least for GNOME 3.4 onwards, we should switch
 to using a keyword in bugzilla, and the release-team, docs team and i18n
 teams can monitor newly request breaks, through RSS feeds (the design
 team does that), and get the keywords cleared when the freeze break has
 a result.
 
 That means that there's no problems with the timeline (patches that go
 in before the request got accepted for example), accountability and
 traceability, as well as visibility for the bugsquad and QA teams in
 downstream communities.
 
 Opinions?

For example, nobody apart from the release-team here would know that I
would have requested a freeze break for
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=659826

___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-22 Thread Matthias Clasen
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net wrote:
 Heya,

 After having to send in another code freeze break request e-mail, I
 realised that the process is problematic. Apart from the release team
 and the patch sender, nobody else knows about the freeze break request,
 or about the status of the request.

 I think that, at the very least for GNOME 3.4 onwards, we should switch
 to using a keyword in bugzilla, and the release-team, docs team and i18n
 teams can monitor newly request breaks, through RSS feeds (the design
 team does that), and get the keywords cleared when the freeze break has
 a result.

 That means that there's no problems with the timeline (patches that go
 in before the request got accepted for example), accountability and
 traceability, as well as visibility for the bugsquad and QA teams in
 downstream communities.

 Opinions?


I'm in favour of anything that makes the process more transparent and
less annoying.
Of course, one of the main purposes of freezes is to slow down the
commit rate, so some annoyance will have to remain as a deterrent...
___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-22 Thread Bastien Nocera
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 18:28 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
 On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net wrote:
  Heya,
 
  After having to send in another code freeze break request e-mail, I
  realised that the process is problematic. Apart from the release team
  and the patch sender, nobody else knows about the freeze break request,
  or about the status of the request.
 
  I think that, at the very least for GNOME 3.4 onwards, we should switch
  to using a keyword in bugzilla, and the release-team, docs team and i18n
  teams can monitor newly request breaks, through RSS feeds (the design
  team does that), and get the keywords cleared when the freeze break has
  a result.
 
  That means that there's no problems with the timeline (patches that go
  in before the request got accepted for example), accountability and
  traceability, as well as visibility for the bugsquad and QA teams in
  downstream communities.
 
  Opinions?
 
 
 I'm in favour of anything that makes the process more transparent and
 less annoying.
 Of course, one of the main purposes of freezes is to slow down the
 commit rate, so some annoyance will have to remain as a deterrent...

I'm guessing that we'd need to refine the criteria for requesting freeze
breaks, and that the release team would remove the keyword and put a
reason why it didn't match the criteria in those cases.

Cheers

___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Using Bugzilla for freeze break requests?

2011-09-22 Thread Shaun McCance
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 22:44 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
 Heya,
 
 After having to send in another code freeze break request e-mail, I
 realised that the process is problematic. Apart from the release team
 and the patch sender, nobody else knows about the freeze break request,
 or about the status of the request.

Who else needs to know about it? For UI and string freeze breaks, you
have to notify the docs resp. i18n teams. The people who are interested
in these sorts of things are subscribed to the mailing lists where they
can find out about them.

 I think that, at the very least for GNOME 3.4 onwards, we should switch
 to using a keyword in bugzilla, and the release-team, docs team and i18n
 teams can monitor newly request breaks, through RSS feeds (the design
 team does that), and get the keywords cleared when the freeze break has
 a result.

If I don't get email notifications, I can pretty much guarantee I won't
deal with it promptly. I don't think you can subscribe to keywords in
Bugzilla to get emails when bugs are tagged.

I understand we'd get better tracking, but using Bugzilla is a lot more
work than sending an email. I gave a docs ack for one UI freeze break
request while on vacation from my phone. Using Bugzilla on a phone is
unpleasant.

Bugzilla is great for making sure stuff doesn't get lost. Do we have
a real problem of requests getting lost?

--
Shaun


___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n