On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 12:02 AM, Adam Williamson > <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, 2016-10-12 at 21:09 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Adam Williamson >>> <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> > On Wed, 2016-10-12 at 09:55 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: >>> > > All of the extra app stuff could be avoided if we disallowed reporters >>> > > (or random people) to change the Severity and Priority fields. >>> > >>> > Mmm, I don't really think so. Presumably it would be maintainers who >>> > got to set those fields, right? But they are doing so in relation to >>> >>> No, why would you presume that? >> >> I dunno, just seemed logical. That's how they're intended to be used at >> present. Bug reporters aren't supposed to set them and don't have the >> privilege purely by rights of having an account...but because we grant >> 'editbugs' to all packagers and all QA team members, in practice a lot >> of the people who actually report bugs do have the power to set it. >> >> If you're suggesting we restrict access to those fields such that even >> the packagers can't use them...well, it's a possibility, but I think at >> least *some* teams do actually use those fields at present, and would >> be inconvenienced by not being able to any more because we'd decided to >> take them over for distribution purposes. >> >>> Right. Which speaks to Matt's "very restricted" list of people. >>> Which would essentially be the same group that is going to do the >>> categorizing anyway. Which means that since the fields are useless >>> today (as in, completely) restricting them to useful to avoid another >>> process or tool could be a possibility. >> >> Well sure, but on the other hand, if all you want to propose is 'do it >> all in Bugzilla', you don't really need to use those fields; just a > > No. My main goal is "stop building one-off tools because existing > tools (or usage of them) suck". If people want to enhance blockerbugs > since it already exists, that's totally fine with me. Basically, I > want us to stop wasting effort and creating more technical debt. I am fine with using just Bugzilla for this purpose. It does not have fancy UI, but the capabilities for this job are sufficient. So, lets start with Bugzilla and we will see whether there will be a need for something more specific as we go. I was also exploring a way how we can ensure the priority/severity fields will not be changed once the bug is tracked as "Important" by someone "non-authorized". My proposal is to use "PM Score" field instead. This is a hidden field, every bug has attached, and is not currently used for bugs in Fedora. The original purpose of this field is to prioritize bugs from the perspective of Product Management, so it in fact reflects what we are trying to achieve. The value of this field is numerical and is visible as a comment any time someone sets or changes its value. It is accessible via XML/RPC only. Bugzilla has also a built-in tool called BRE (Bugzilla Rule Engine) which allow us to react on a change of a field and do some actions. So we might then enforce value of bug's priority according to the value sets in the PM Score field, if this will be useful. Regards, Jan > josh > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Jan Kuřík Platform & Fedora Program Manager Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
