Severity / priority project: the home stretch

[Adam Williamson]

Hi, folks!

So, we're nearing the final stretch of the severity / priority
project. :)

I have, as I noted previously, added some text to the triage guide to
cover this:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/How_to_Triage#Checklist_for_NEW...
(section 9)

I have now added a section to the bug lifecycle page with a more
complete and formal explanation, partly taken from the Beland 'Legend'
draft page where we kicked around the competing systems:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#Priority_and_...
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Beland/Bugzilla_Legend#Severity_and_P...

I'll send an announcement to -devel-list soon. So, now, the priority /
severity project is officially Open. BugZappers, please, if you haven't
been already, start assigning a severity to all bugs as you triage them,
according to the information above. This will be taken seriously and
used in various ways.

Talking about use, I will soon send out a review of bugs open on Rawhide
and marked 'critical' severity. I'd like to have a review of this set of
bugs each week. I don't necessarily want to be the one doing it,
however. :) It'd be an ideal project for a community member: it's quite
straightforward and requires no secret sauce, all you have to do is take
a quick look at a saved query each week, do some copy/paste-ing, and
pontificate. :) Let me know if you'd be interested in doing this.

We'll also be reviewing all 'critical' bugs (and, if we get ambitious,
even 'high' bugs in key components) during the blocker bug review
meetings for F12, and the triage metric system will probably use the
severity ratings for some metrics too.

Thanks everyone who contributed on this project!
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

[iarly selbir]

The version shouldn't be *10, 11 and rawhide* on point 6?

Regards,

- -
iarly selbir | ski0s

:wq!


On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:

>  Hi, folks!
>
>  So, we're nearing the final stretch of the severity / priority
>  project. :)
>
>  I have, as I noted previously, added some text to the triage guide to
>  cover this:
>
>
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/How_to_Triage#Checklist_for_NEW...
> 9)
>
>  I have now added a section to the bug lifecycle page with a more
>  complete and formal explanation, partly taken from the Beland 'Legend'
>  draft page where we kicked around the competing systems:
>
>
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#Priority_and_...
>
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Beland/Bugzilla_Legend#Severity_and_P...
>
>  I'll send an announcement to -devel-list soon. So, now, the priority /
>  severity project is officially Open. BugZappers, please, if you haven't
>  been already, start assigning a severity to all bugs as you triage them,
>  according to the information above. This will be taken seriously and
>  used in various ways.
>
>  Talking about use, I will soon send out a review of bugs open on Rawhide
>  and marked 'critical' severity. I'd like to have a review of this set of
>  bugs each week. I don't necessarily want to be the one doing it,
>  however. :) It'd be an ideal project for a community member: it's quite
>  straightforward and requires no secret sauce, all you have to do is take
>  a quick look at a saved query each week, do some copy/paste-ing, and
>  pontificate. :) Let me know if you'd be interested in doing this.
>
>  We'll also be reviewing all 'critical' bugs (and, if we get ambitious,
>  even 'high' bugs in key components) during the blocker bug review
>  meetings for F12, and the triage metric system will probably use the
>  severity ratings for some metrics too.
>
>  Thanks everyone who contributed on this project!
>  --
>  Adam Williamson
>  Fedora QA Community Monkey
>  IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
>  http://www.happyassassin.net
>
>  --
>  fedora-test-list mailing list
>  fedora-test-list(a)redhat.com
>  To unsubscribe:
>  https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
>

[iarly selbir]

Ops, on the how to triage page.


Regards,

- -
iarly selbir | ski0s

:wq!


On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 9:50 AM, iarly selbir | ski0s <iarlyy(a)gmail.com&gt;wrote:

>  The version shouldn't be *10, 11 and rawhide* on point 6?
>
>  Regards,
>
>  - -
>  iarly selbir | ski0s
>
>  :wq!
>
>
>  On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt;wrote:
>
> > Hi, folks!
> >
> > So, we're nearing the final stretch of the severity / priority
> > project. :)
> >
> > I have, as I noted previously, added some text to the triage guide to
> > cover this:
> >
> >
> >
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/How_to_Triage#Checklist_for_NEW...
> 9)
> >
> > I have now added a section to the bug lifecycle page with a more
> > complete and formal explanation, partly taken from the Beland 'Legend'
> > draft page where we kicked around the competing systems:
> >
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#Priority_and_...
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Beland/Bugzilla_Legend#Severity_and_P...
> >
> > I'll send an announcement to -devel-list soon. So, now, the priority /
> > severity project is officially Open. BugZappers, please, if you haven't
> > been already, start assigning a severity to all bugs as you triage them,
> > according to the information above. This will be taken seriously and
> > used in various ways.
> >
> > Talking about use, I will soon send out a review of bugs open on Rawhide
> > and marked 'critical' severity. I'd like to have a review of this set of
> > bugs each week. I don't necessarily want to be the one doing it,
> > however. :) It'd be an ideal project for a community member: it's quite
> > straightforward and requires no secret sauce, all you have to do is take
> > a quick look at a saved query each week, do some copy/paste-ing, and
> > pontificate. :) Let me know if you'd be interested in doing this.
> >
> > We'll also be reviewing all 'critical' bugs (and, if we get ambitious,
> > even 'high' bugs in key components) during the blocker bug review
> > meetings for F12, and the triage metric system will probably use the
> > severity ratings for some metrics too.
> >
> > Thanks everyone who contributed on this project!
> > --
> > Adam Williamson
> > Fedora QA Community Monkey
> > IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
> > http://www.happyassassin.net
> >
> > --
> > fedora-test-list mailing list
> > fedora-test-list(a)redhat.com
> > To unsubscribe:
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
> >
>
>

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 09:50 -0300, iarly selbir | ski0s wrote:
>  The version shouldn't be 10, 11 and rawhide on point 6? 
That's not really relevant to the severity/priority stuff, but you're
right, that needs updating :)

Maybe we need a {{supported_versions}} template? Heh.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

[iarly selbir]

I haven't been read this page lately... so I read all on the page :D


Regards,

- -
iarly selbir | ski0s

:wq!


On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt;wrote:

>  On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 09:50 -0300, iarly selbir | ski0s wrote:
>  > The version shouldn't be 10, 11 and rawhide on point 6?
>
>  That's not really relevant to the severity/priority stuff, but you're
>  right, that needs updating :)
>
>  Maybe we need a {{supported_versions}} template? Heh.
>  --
>  Adam Williamson
>  Fedora QA Community Monkey
>  IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
>  http://www.happyassassin.net
>
>  --
>  fedora-test-list mailing list
>  fedora-test-list(a)redhat.com
>  To unsubscribe:
>  https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
>

[Dave Jones]

On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 08:06:06PM +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
 
>  Talking about use, I will soon send out a review of bugs open on
> Rawhide
>  and marked 'critical' severity. I'd like to have a review of this set of
>  bugs each week. I don't necessarily want to be the one doing it,
>  however. :) It'd be an ideal project for a community member: it's quite
>  straightforward and requires no secret sauce, all you have to do is take
>  a quick look at a saved query each week, do some copy/paste-ing, and
>  pontificate. :) Let me know if you'd be interested in doing this.
>  
>  We'll also be reviewing all 'critical' bugs (and, if we get ambitious,
>  even 'high' bugs in key components) during the blocker bug review
>  meetings for F12, and the triage metric system will probably use the
>  severity ratings for some metrics too. 
For the kernel, I'm tempted to just mass-clear all the severity tags,
because as I mentioned before you embarked on this project, they are
utterly meaningless.

Case in point: http://is.gd/1mTt5

Asides from making the buglist look so unreadable I can't read it
for more than a few minutes without getting irritated, a quick skim shows
the main problem. People think a suspend/resume failure is urgent.
Or that their DVD writer can't write discs. Or that their sound card
doesn't play sounds. Or just about anything imaginable.

That this field remains user settable makes it a complete disaster.

	Dave

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 23:44 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
>  For the kernel, I'm tempted to just mass-clear all the severity
> tags,
>  because as I mentioned before you embarked on this project, they are
>  utterly meaningless.
>  
>  Case in point: http://is.gd/1mTt5
>  
>  Asides from making the buglist look so unreadable I can't read it
>  for more than a few minutes without getting irritated, a quick skim
>  shows
>  the main problem. People think a suspend/resume failure is urgent.
>  Or that their DVD writer can't write discs. Or that their sound card
>  doesn't play sounds. Or just about anything imaginable.
>  
>  That this field remains user settable makes it a complete disaster. 
It isn't. It's only settable by people with editbugs priorities, which
is members of the 'fedorabugs' FAS group, which is (basically)
maintainers and BugZappers.

See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495985 .

Of course, if this doesn't change your mind, you are entirely free to do
as you suggested and mass-set the tag to whatever you like for the
kernel, since you are one of the maintainers of it. As the email
mentions, the policy is that maintainers have ultimate control of both
fields.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net