On 08.05.23 22:09, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Sat, 6 May 2023 08:20:23 +0200 Linux regression tracking (Thorsten > Leemhuis) wrote: >>> I don't seem to have the permissions on BZ, but I'm guessing we could >>> do the opposite - you could flip bugbot on first to have it flush the BZ >>> report to the list, and then reply on the list with regzbot tracking? >> >> That's the plan for the future, but for now I don't want to do that, as >> it might mess up other peoples workflows, as hinted above already and >> discussed here: >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/1f0ebf13-ab0f-d512-6106-3ebf7cb372f1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ >> >> That was only recently, but if you jump in there as well it might >> persuade Konstantin to enable bugbot for other products/components. Then >> I could and would do what you suggested. > > CC: workflows > > I'm a bit confused. I understand that we don't want to automatically > send all bugzilla reports to the ML. But AFAIU this is to avoid spamming > the list / messing with people's existing BZ workflow. > If you pre-triage the problem and decide to forward it to the list - > whether you do it with buzbot + regzbot or manual + regzbot is moot. > > The bugbot can be enabled per BZ entry (AFAIU), so you can flip it > individually for the thread you want to report. It should flush that > BZ to the list. At which point you can follow your normal ML regression > process. > > Where did I go off the rails? You missed that Konstantin (now CCed) is just a bit careful for the bugbot bring up and therefore for now only allows bugbot to be enabled for BZ entries that are filed against the product/component combination Linux/Kernel. I could reassigning bugs there, but that would break the workflow for maintainers like Kalle, which look at all bugs assigned to their product/component combo (Drivers/network-wireless in Kalle's case). Ciao, Thorsten
