On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:51:19AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Lallement wrote: > On 11/22/2010 10:22 PM, Brian Murray wrote: > > As we all know there are a lot of packages and bugs to keep track of in > > Ubuntu. One idea that occurred to me recently, to help identify > > packages in need of triage, was to calculate an average bug heat for the > > particular package. I've made a first pass at this using all the > > packages in the ubuntu-desktop package set. Here are the top 10 > > packages: > > > > usb-modeswitch-data - median: 764, mode: 1448 > > language-pack-gnome-fa-base - median: 408, mode: 408 > > language-pack-gnome-pt - median: 318, mode: 318 > > couchdb-glib - median: 210, mode: 210 > > netbook-meta - median: 145, mode: 408 > > pyopenssl - median: 136, mode: 259 > > shotwell - median: 124, mode: 6 > > appmenu-gtk - median: 122, mode: 408 > > gnome-python-extras - median: 114, mode: 3 > > telepathy-gabble - median: 104, mode: 49 > > > > As I ran this last Friday there might be some variance in the numbers. > > I'm curious whether or not you think the bug reports for these packages > > really need reviewing. > > > > Thanks, > > > Thanks Brian. This is really interesting. If we apply this calculation > to the packages installed by default in Natty, the top 10 looks like: > shotwell - median: 189 > empathy - median: 91 > gcalctool - median: 86 > gbrainy - median: 86 > gwibber - median: 81 > simple-scan - median: 76 > software-center - median: 68 > pitivi - median: 68 > transmission - median: 60 > gnome-bluetooth - median: 59 > > Compared to the list based on the number of bugs: > evolution > firefox > gdmsetup > nautilus > nm-connection-editor > ooffice > software-center > totem > update-manager > > So I can not say that this is the list that I had in mind, but the > result is expected. > When we build the list based on volume of bugs, we get the most used > applications. But when we use the bug heat we get the applications with > fewer bugs but which are in need of triage (I'm not saying that the > applications with a large number of bugs don't need triage) > > The list needs a closer look though. For instance: > - shotwell is in 1rst position, but when I look at the reports, there > are 2 bugs with a heat of 3491, and I don't see anything specific that > could explain such a value. Is it the weight of untriaged report being a > bit too important or something else ? It doesn't seem to match the bug > heat algorithm.
Looking closer at the bug heat algorithm it seems that a fair bit of it is based on recent activity. From some of the documentation the theory follows: Bug has been active within the past 24 hours Add 25% of the project's hottest bug's score divided by the number of days since the first activity on the bug in question Bug has not been active* in within the past 24 hours Subtract 1% of the bug heat score for every day of inactivity So it seems to follow that the newest bugs will the highest heat. I guess there is a larger question of what we think makes a bug hot. Initially, I thought the number of users affected, number of subscribers and number of duplicates (among some other things) was a good indicator. Two out of those three things are now cached on the bug table so we could recreate the bug heat without taking into account recent activity. I feel like this might provide a more useful number. > - gbrainy, I was surprised to find a game in the list. In fact, there is > a very limited number of bugs filed against this package and some of > them with high heat. I've triaged the report with the highest heat > (>300) and it fell to a heat of 12. So the next run of your script > should move it lower into the list. > - gcalctool, same thing, the first bug had a heat of 237, and after > asking for more information it fell to 8. > > So, yes, this is useful to help us to direct our testing and triaging > effort. But the calculation of the bug heat needs to be clarified. > Maybe this could be added to the 'Opportunities' list in harvest ? By this do you mean the hottest, those outside the standard deviation, bugs for a package should be listed as an opportunity in harvest? Thanks, -- Brian Murray Ubuntu Bug Master
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- Ubuntu-qa mailing list Ubuntu-qa@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-qa