Warren Togami wrote:
First of all let me say that I'm very happy that this process is still
being worked on / streamlined!
Raw notes... your comments would be very much appreciated.
Key Changes from Previous Procedures
====================================
1) Assigned to pointer indicates that there is a reviewer. Assigned
pointer to nobody means there is no reviewer yet.
2) BLANK means review not requested. ? means review requested. This
makes it easier to query, because querying for BLANK is a bit inefficient.
(Good idea, bad idea?)
3) NEEDINFO is used to avoid changing the Assigned pointer when fixes
are needed.
4) Assigned pointer DOES NOT CHANGE during and after the review.
Fedora Review Flag States
=========================
fedora-review BLANK (Not under review at all!)
fedora-review? (I want a review)
fedora-review- (rejected, needs work, set NEEDINFO to person who needs
to fix it)
fedora-review+ (APPROVED)
Why all the ping-ponging between ? and - during the review and all the
ping-ponging between ASSIGNED and NEEDINFO. In FE we've never done this
ping-ponging and we've never felt a need to introduce this IMHO this are
just unnecesarry mouse clicks. NEEDINFO and fedora-review- may be a good
idea if either the person requesting the review or the reviewer are slow
to respond. But in my experience there is a bit of quick discussion
between the two and the whole review process is finished with a day or
two (for normal packages) I really feel that all this changing of flags
and status is just unnecesarry mouse clicks.
Assigned Pointer
================
(Note, Assigned pointer is different from the ASSIGNED state.)
- Assigned pointer to nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx if no reviewer yet.
- Assigned pointer to reviewer, during and after review.
- Set Assigned pointer back to nobody if reviewer gave up.
Good.
Bugzilla States
===============
NEW ASSIGNED REOPENED (rather meaningless distinction?)
NEEDINFO (to owner or somebody who needs to act to fix)
MODIFIED (seems to be fixed, please test it)
CLOSED (ticket is done)
Process
=======
1. Review Request is filed.
2. Set fedora-review? flag to signify that the ticket is ready for review.
Shouldn't the review request form also set this flag for us, I see no
gain in having todo this manually.
3. Reviewer takes bug, Assigned pointer set to self.
4. If APPROVED, fedora-review+.
5. If rejected, fedora-review- and NEEDINFO owner to fix it.
What is rejected? See above, often there are a couple of small must FIX
/ should fix items, which usually get fixed really soon.
6. If fedora-review- and owner fixes something, set back to ? to request
review again.
Ping-pong-ping-pong, /me no like
7. After fedora-review+, initiate the fedora-cvs request procedure.
8. After fedora-cvs, checkin, build, and set to CLOSED.
Drawbacks
=========
Since the mass review tickets were not filed by the package owners, it
is less than obvious. Most reviews however are filed by owners, so this
is less of a problem beyond this mass review.
to much ping-pong
Other Possibilities
===================
fedora-review? could also be used on any other Fedora bug when a
horrible mess is found in an existing package, and attention for a
re-review would be desired to fix it. (Good idea, bad idea?)
In general I like being able to say this is a mess, this needs a
re-review, but we need some rules for this, like whom may initiate this?
Possible Process Optimizations
==============================
(These might possibly help... although they might require hacks in
Bugzilla's code, so we only request these optimizations only if they
would make a huge positive difference. Your thoughts?)
1. Changing fedora-review in any way should auto-CC yourself automatically.
Not necessary with the new assigned rules, the review requester is the
reporter and thus get mails, the reviewer is the assignee and thus gets
mail.
2. Changing fedora-review to + should auto-set Assigned pointer to self.
? You write above "Assigned pointer to reviewer, during and after
review." notice the and after, thus this also isn't needed.
Regards,
Hans
--
Fedora-maintainers mailing list
Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
--
Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list
Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
