It seems that whole discussion resolves around the same problem of cherry-picking causing too much bug noise. :)
It would be very easy to store the "is this on the branch" bit off on a separate server. If someone could describe in greater detail the Qt release process, I suspect we could easily design a separate store for this data (and tools to manipulate it). The current system you all are using has no way to do multi-bug queries it seems. You can't answer the question "how many bugs aren't merged", or? And to check if a bug is merged you have to load the whole bug and look for the special comment? -eric On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 4:28 AM, Antonio Gomes <toniki...@gmail.com> wrote: > We had this exactly discussion in qtwebkit mailing list days ago: > https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-qt/2011-May/001555.html . It is > worth reading through if you are interested in this topic! > > We would really like to reduce the noise of "management bugmails", but > without a clear good solution for now yet. The "silent" comments suggested > by Evan would be a great alternative to the problem if bugzilla could get > expanded to support it, imo... > > > On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 7:05 PM, Evan Martin <e...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:54 PM, Eric Seidel <e...@webkit.org> wrote: >> > I get a lot of these: >> > Revision r86028 cherry-picked into qtwebkit-2.2 with commit 7e1bab1 >> > <http://gitorious.org/webkit/qtwebkit/commit/7e1bab1> >> > as bug mail. Probably because I'm CC'd on a zillion bugs (and actually >> read >> > my bug mail). >> > >> > This is probably the pot calling the kettle black, since I wrote many of >> the >> > bots which comment daily on bugs... >> > ...but, I'm wondering if we can do better? >> > Would it better serve the cherry-picker's needs if we instead had a >> separate >> > server to track revision -> cherry-picks? Or bug ids -> cherry-picks? >> (Like >> > how the EWS bots store their status on queues.webkit.org and display it >> in >> > little bubbles on bugs.webkit.org w/o commenting on the bugs.) >> > >> > I'm strongly supportive of all clients of webkit storing all of their >> > bug-related data in bugs.webkit.org. It's better than the alternative >> (lots >> > of data buried in old Radars, or Chromium bugs, etc.) >> > But perhaps someone has a good idea how to reduce unnecessary bugmail? >> >> I've seen some bug trackers reduce email by allowing you to comment >> without sending email. In effect you're just attaching metadata to >> the bug without notifying everyone about it. >> >> However, the comments left by the EWS are intended for the bug authors >> and so they probably should continue sending mail. >> _______________________________________________ >> webkit-dev mailing list >> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org >> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev >> > > > > -- > --Antonio Gomes > > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org > http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev > >
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev