On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 29 Jun 2016 16:20:32 -0600 > Chris Murphy <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > ...snip... > >> The questions then, are: >> - Have we reached the pinnacle notification method of blocker bugs to >> maintainers? Or is there a better way to do this? > > Well, I actually think the human touch here helps. (ie, when adamw does > do a roundup and tries to contact people with an update email), Which > makes it particularly hard to automate without being anoying. If maintainers are satisfied with the existing official ways of finding out if they have a blocking bug, then it's a non-issue. 1. Bugzilla email. 2. Adam's roundup email blast to lists. 3. Fedora Blocker Bug Tracking app. 4. Fedora Package Database > Package > Bugs will list blockers apparently. Then I'd say it's a non-issue. Two of these are active notifications by email. Two are passive. The reality is there's a non-trivial number of blocker bugs each release where none of those four methods registers with the maintainer. And they only end up becoming aware of the blocker bug through direct contact. >> - Would it help to have a nagbot (or enhance zodbot) to ping >> maintainers on IRC? Is the nagbot more or less likely to be ignored, >> or would it be about the same? Of course there are lower level >> questions about whether it's possible, what work it entails, would it >> be opt in or opt out, could notifications happen outside IRC, but for >> now I think the "in general" high level context is more useful. > > No, I think it would not help. :) > > First, there's a number of folks who aren't on IRC (shocking I know), > then it gets back to the impersonalness of it... We know those IRC nags work quickly. And those often happen as a result of maintainer silence when QA asks in Bugzilla for status updates. I also know that no one in QA likes the direct approach, even though its effective. There's no official mechanism by which direct contact will happen, it's entirely seat of the pants, and it's inconsistent when it happens and who does it. > I'm not really sure that we have had slips (which as Matt tells us, are > completely expected and fine) due to some maintainer not realizing a > bug was a blocker and not looking at it. In general it's been because > the maintainer has lots of other things going on, or the bug is > difficult to fix and just takes time. I understand slips are expected and fine. But I sense a distinct sad panda in QA when there's a slip. We probably haven't had a slip due to a maintainer not realizing a bug was a blocker and not looking at it, because eventually someone in QA gets annoyed or nervous enough that they break down and make direct contact. Even I've done this and I'm about the last personality type who decides to become responsible for other people's behavior, and it's always been a "oh I didn't know it was a blocker". Anyway, in the meantime then, I will encourage QA folks to have a thicker skin over slips, and not feel like they're obligated to become personal assistants to remind maintainers about their bugs. -- Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
