12:00 -!- poelcat changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: Bug Triage Meeting
12:00 < poelcat> Hello Bug Triage Party People!
12:00 < poelcat> who is around?
12:01  * nirik is sorta here... trying to deal with the avalanche of his email.
12:02  * jmn says yo
12:03 < poelcat> nirik: any luck on finding out how to modify bugbot?
12:03 < poelcat> jmn: howdy
12:03 -!- poelcat changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: Bug Triage Meeting -- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/Meetings/Agenda-2008-Jan-30
12:03 < nirik> poelcat: I talked with mkant some. I think we should come up with a list of what we need it to do...
12:03  * mefoster would like to help out with bug triage if I can
12:03 < nirik> I haven't had a chance to look at filtering the existing channel
12:03 < poelcat> mefoster: welcome!
12:03 -!- snavin_ [n=snavin@124.43.41.175] has quit [Client Quit]
12:04 < poelcat> nirik: i'll take action to create a simple 'requirements doc'
12:04 < nirik> poelcat: ok, that would be great. I am sure we can get it to report what we want... either to fedora-qa, or some new channel.
12:05 < poelcat> okay looking at items to followup from previous meetings
12:05 < poelcat> we just covered one
12:05 < poelcat> :)
12:05 < poelcat> jds2001 can't make it today
12:05 -!- smooge [n=smooge@canopus.unm.edu] has joined #fedora-meeting
12:06 < poelcat> anyone know if inode0 has done anything with the 'university outreach' angle?
12:07 < poelcat> i'll take that as a "no"
12:07 < poelcat> next open topic was canned queries to locate bugs needing triage
12:08 < poelcat> snecklifter updated this page http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/FindingBugs
12:08 < smooge> what do you mean?
12:08 < smooge> university outreach
12:09 < poelcat> smooge: at a previous meeting we were talking about ways to find people to engage in helping w/ bug triage
12:09 -!- nphilipp [n=nils@155.56.26.52] has quit ["Leaving"]
12:09 < poelcat> the thought was that university students might be a good group of folks to talk to
12:09 < smooge> ah. I don't think I have seen anything from in0de on this
12:10 < poelcat> smooge: okay. jds2001 said he was looking into it too... i'll check w/ him later
12:11 -!- EvilBob [n=bob@fedora/pdpc.sustaining.BobJensen] has quit [Remote closed the connection]
12:11 < poelcat> next followup item was wiki updating (my action item)
12:11  * jds2001 is here-ish
12:11 < poelcat> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers
12:11 < poelcat> is the front page
12:11 < poelcat> adding newer links to the bottom
12:12 < jds2001> poelcat: i killed the stock responses link at the bottom - i think it's redundant
12:12 < poelcat> and trying to split off like information into streamlined pages
12:12 < poelcat> jds2001: yeah, I've got a stock response for that :)
12:12 < poelcat> jk
12:12 < poelcat> that's fine
12:13 < poelcat> i think the tools page needs to be rounded out more
12:13 -!- axelilly [n=jdf@208-51-242-037.vitamix.com] has joined #fedora-meeting
12:13 < poelcat> in particular, does anyone know if there is a good resource somewhere about "locating duplicates"?
12:14 < poelcat> several people have mentioned that this is one of the keys to being a good triager
12:14 -!- fab_away [n=bellet@bellet.info] has joined #fedora-meeting
12:14 < jmn> Can we snarf the bugzilla.gnome.org script to do that?
12:14 < jds2001> it is.  I tend to use the specific search
12:14 < jds2001> which searches summaries *and* comments
12:14 < jds2001> with some well-chosen keywords :)
12:15 < jmn> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/duplicates.cgi
12:15 < jds2001> hmm, i'm banned from gnome bugzilla :P
12:16  * poelcat added a new section to the bottom of http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/FindingBugs
12:16 < poelcat> for duplicates writeup
12:16 < axelilly> jmn:  it looks like the script at gnome bugzilla would be very usefull in detecting and reporting duplicates
12:17 < poelcat> jmn: could you help us getting it working?
12:17 < jmn> The entire http://bugzilla.gnome.org/page.cgi?id=reports.html page is really useful.
12:17 < jmn> poelcat: I have failed at this once before, but would be happy to try again :).
12:17 < poelcat> jmn what were the pain points?
12:17 < jds2001> since i can't see it, what does it do?
12:18  * jds2001 sent mail to bugmaster@gnome.org asking why our NAT address is banned :P
12:18 < jmn> poelcat: access and resource conflicts
12:18 < axelilly> jds2001: lists Bug#, Dupe Count, Change in last 7 days, etc
12:19 < poelcat> jds2001: must be your ISP ;-)
12:19 < jds2001> lol
12:19 < nirik> FWIW don't they get a lot more dups because of bug buddy? or do those not go there?
12:19 < jds2001> they get a *ton* of dupes via bug-buddy
12:19 < jds2001> and they have scripts to handle that, iirc
12:19 < poelcat> jmn: "access" to what?
12:19 < jmn> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/reports/weekly-bug-summary.cgi is another really useful report for sensing trends.
12:20 < jds2001> hmm, I've been compiling that sorta data manually jmn
12:20 < axelilly> are those custom reports they wrote or are they part of bugzilla?
12:20 < jmn> poelcat: Let's have this conversation privately.  I don't want to out my friends and co-workers publicly
12:20 < poelcat> lol
12:20 < jds2001> custom - both gnome's and rh's bugzillas are hacked up beyond recognition :)
12:21 -!- kital [n=Joerg_Si@fedora/kital] has joined #fedora-meeting
12:21 -!- JSchmitt [n=s4504kr@fedora/JSchmitt] has quit ["Konversation terminated!"]
12:22 < axelilly> so, will someone need to contact gnome to ask for those scripts?
12:22 < poelcat> okay so looks like we can figure out a few things by digging deeper into gnome setup
12:22 < poelcat> 1) identify dups
12:22 < poelcat> 2) better reports
12:23 < jmn> axelilly: Yeah, I'll take that, unless someone has a contact and wants to wrestle me for it (I surrender easily).
12:23 < poelcat> jmn: sold to the highest bidder!
12:24  * jmn bids $-20
12:24 < poelcat> next topic
12:24 -!- JSchmitt [n=s4504kr@p54B1221F.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #fedora-meeting
12:24 < poelcat> in past meeting we talked about asking people to commit to triage for a certain length of time
12:24 < poelcat> I sketched something out here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/Joining #4
12:25 < poelcat> any thoughts/ideas/criticisms?
12:25 < jds2001> looks good to me :)
12:25 < axelilly> looks good to me
12:25 < jds2001> notting had a good point that they do need to know triagers from joe schmoe
12:26 < axelilly> so, the time period would last for the whole cycle?
12:26 < nirik> sure, can give it a try and see if we need adjustment
12:26 < poelcat> axelilly: that was the simplest thing I could think of
12:26 < poelcat> we want a way to flush the list periodically so it doesn't get stale
12:26 < poelcat> w/o firing everyone and starting over :)
12:27 < axelilly> sounds good, it might be good to point out that theses are the commited zappers, but any other zappers are encouraged to help out at will, even if not currently commited.
12:27 < nirik> I just want a list so I can see how many people we have (approx)... ie, do we have enough to matter?
12:27 < mefoster> As a prospective triager: how would sign-up actually happen? Editing a wiki page, or ... ?
12:27 < poelcat> mefoster: yes, good point
12:28 < poelcat> i think this is critical to a lot of things in Fedora... it is hard to attract and retain people if there isn't critical mass
12:29 < poelcat> anything else on this topic?
12:29 < jds2001> mefoster: i think that editing the wiki page would be good.
12:29 < nirik> also, would it make sense to add areas in there?
12:29 -!- DanseMakabre [i=pat@gandalf.ds5.agh.edu.pl] has joined #fedora-meeting
12:30 < nirik> ie, Joe Bob - libvirt, pruit bugs
12:30 -!- DanseMakabre [i=pat@gandalf.ds5.agh.edu.pl] has quit [Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)]
12:30 < nirik> or Phred Jones - general
12:30 -!- J5 [n=quintice@nat/redhat/x-175f9d6400de1513] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)]
12:30 < jds2001> nirik: probably
12:30 -!- ldimaggi_ [n=ldimaggi@nat/redhat/x-984dde3fa818a91a] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)]
12:31 < poelcat> nirik: i fear if we list by package we'll have a list that scrolls like the bugzilla bug entry page :)
12:31 < jds2001> lol
12:31 < poelcat> s/page/srpm list
12:31 < jds2001> maybe major functional area
12:31 < nirik> yeah, true... by comps groups?
12:31 -!- fab_away is now known as fab
12:32 < jmn> +1 to major functional areas/comp groups
12:32 < mefoster> If reproducing the bug is important, it's also relevant what hardware you have
12:32 < jds2001> it's not required to reproduce it....if you can, that's great, though not absolutely required.
12:33 -!- ldimaggi_ [n=ldimaggi@nat/redhat/x-2d726bbc7bcbcf9b] has joined #fedora-meeting
12:33 < poelcat> at least people would know my house isn't worth robbing
12:33 < jds2001> hehe
12:34 < poelcat> who can stub out this wiki page?
12:34 -!- echapin [n=echapin@nat/redhat/x-00399ec7bc1bc2cb] has joined #fedora-meeting
12:36 < poelcat> okay. who can send me a list of the major functional areas and comps groups?
12:36 < jmn> Sorry, stopped paying attention for a second.  I can take that.
12:36 < poelcat> jmn: thanks!
12:37 < poelcat> thoughts and comments  to flame fest created by: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JohnPoelstra/BugLifeCycle
12:38 < mefoster> What was the big issue in the flamefest?
12:38 -!- joadams [n=joadams@nat/redhat/x-b77cd0b1ca50e254] has joined #fedora-meeting
12:39 < poelcat> one bug for one release for one issue
12:39 -!- llaumgui [n=llaumgui@213.161.192.247] has quit [Read error: 113 (No route to host)]
12:39 < poelcat> mostly the one bug for one release vs. covering multiple releases
12:39 -!- echapin [n=echapin@nat/redhat/x-00399ec7bc1bc2cb] has left #fedora-meeting ["Leaving"]
12:39 < poelcat> i'm not sure however, that is our call to make
12:40 -!- mthompson [n=Michelle@nat/redhat/x-4146ed8f664a9607] has joined #fedora-meeting
12:40 < poelcat> also question raised as to what correct CLOSED:______ state for bugs auto-closed by bodhi
12:41 -!- echapin [n=echapin@nat/redhat/x-1d2b56bed7530da7] has joined #fedora-meeting
12:43 < jds2001> poelcat: why is it not our call?
12:43 < jds2001> poelcat: lmacken is going to investigate automation of that.
12:43 < nirik> well, it affects maintainers workflows a lot too...
12:43 < poelcat> jds2001: who decides whether or not a maintainer has to clone bugs for each release?
12:44 < axelilly> I'm confused why you would have one bug over several releases?  Is it if it wasn't fixed in the first released it was noticed in?
12:44 < jds2001> poelcat: if lmacken succeeds, they won't have to.  Bodhi will do that for them.
12:44 -!- blitzkrieg3 [n=james@65.215.14.158] has joined #fedora-meeting
12:44 < jds2001> axelilly: so you can fix it separately in each branch
12:45 < jds2001> axelilly: i'm confused as well, but when we changed it, flamefest ensued.
12:45 < poelcat> axelilly: and be explicit about which releases you fixed or didn't
12:46 < poelcat> nirik: are there any existing FESCo/pkg maintainer guidelines about bugzilla usage?
12:46 < nirik> not that I know of...
12:46 < poelcat> nirik: we couldn't find any which is why jds2001 created the lifecycle
12:47 < nirik> yep. Agreed... and this needs to get hashed out... but getting people to change the way they do things is hard... especially when it means more work for them.
12:47 < jds2001> i think alot of it is that folks are resistant to change...
12:47 < jds2001> but i'm not entirely sure.
12:47 < wwoods> If a bug exists in rawhide and F8
12:47 < wwoods> it's a different procedure to push out a fix for each
12:48 < wwoods> for rawhide you can likely just, you know, move to latest upstream
12:48 < poelcat> jds2001: was the issue of "one bug one release" part of the proposal FESCo voted on?
12:48 < poelcat> or do we need to write another one?
12:48 < jds2001> poelcat: i think so, but f13 had issues.
12:48 < wwoods> for F8? maybe move to upstream, but you might be backporting patches instead.. and then you have to go through updates-testing
12:49 < jds2001> f13 had valid issues, in that we need to allow maintainers to "opt-out"
12:49 < jds2001> but if you want us to manage bugs for you, it's our way.
12:49  * nirik isn't sure still what the multiple bugs gets us... tracking for when a bug was fixed per release, but do we really care?
12:50 < jds2001> am I not understanding f13's response?
12:51 < wwoods> so you've got two different patches and two different workflows to fix for two different releases. that's two different bugs, really
12:51 < f13> nirik: many of our users do
12:51 < f13> nirik: us fixing it in rawhide and then closing the bug doesn't help them on F-7
12:51 < wwoods> the arguments against this mostly come down to: "meh. lazy."
12:51 < nirik> f13: sure, but if they care, they can file a F7 bug?
12:51 < nirik> or if it was F7 to begin with, we shouldn't close it rawhide.
12:51 < f13> nirik: what if they did?
12:52 < f13> and it was fixed closed rawhide?
12:52 < nirik> I don't think thats an acceptable closing for that bug unless the reporter is ok with it.
12:52 < f13> or what if the fix that was built across the branches didn't actually work on F-7 while it did in F-8 and devel, or it introduced some other regression on the branch?
12:53 < f13> I agree that if we're going to /force/ multiple bugs, we should have easy to use tools to set them up
12:53 < f13> but I don't want to force, just like I don't want to force everybody to use bodhi's methods.
12:53 < nirik> there can be all sorts of corner cases... in that one, fix F7 again, or close WONTFIX, or something...
12:53 < f13> We have guidelines of how we think it should be done, which we urge you to follow.  If you don't and continually piss of your users, we'lld eal with it.
12:54 < nirik> agreed.
12:54 < mefoster> Real-world example: I filed a Fedora 7 bug, it was closed RAWHIDE, fix isn't available yet outside RAWHIDE: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253201
12:54 < buggbot> Bug 253201: low, low, ---, Rex Dieter, CLOSED RAWHIDE, kdeartwork: Can see xscreensaver savers, but I can't use them
12:55 < mefoster> (Nothing against rdieter, by the way -- it was a fiddly thing to find!)
12:55 < nirik> yeah, might just be an oversight... since he is busy with kde4. ;) I would ping the bug again asking for f7 update for it...
12:55 < rdieter> mefoster: fix *was* made available to F-7/F-8 I thought. ??
12:55 < mefoster> Not pushed yet.
12:56 < poelcat> so what does all this mean for what we tell bug triagers to do?
12:56 < rdieter> well, crap, you're right (I think I had intended to do it...).
12:56 < nirik> poelcat: can we re-work things so we have:
12:57 < nirik> a) an opt out for maintainers on the multiple bugs... and b) a automated way to file those bugs so we don't pile work on maintainers?
12:57 < nirik> if we do b) we might get most everyone out of a).
12:58 < poelcat> nirik: right... i think we've come full circle
12:58 < poelcat> and luke is looking into that according to jds2001
12:58 < poelcat> ?
12:58 < jds2001> yep, maybe we move that outside bodhi to some other app
12:58 < jds2001> not entirely sure what, though.
12:58 < poelcat> so we can move forward, okay if we table this topic?
12:59 -!- rahul_b [n=rbhalera@123.236.177.158] has joined #fedora-meeting
12:59 -!- hircus [n=michel@adsl-76-251-80-217.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net] has quit ["Ex-Chat"]
12:59  * knurd wonders if we (EPEL) can start out meeting here in time
12:59 < poelcat> for now we will not include "one bug one release" as a triager step
12:59 < poelcat> ?
12:59 -!- spoleeba [n=one@fedora/Jef] has joined #fedora-meeting
12:59  * knurd wonders if we should move the EPEL meeting to #epel
12:59 < jds2001> poelcat: yea, we're intruding on EPEL
12:59 < jds2001> we can move to #fedora-qa
12:59 < poelcat> we have 10 seconds left :)
12:59 < jds2001> lol
13:00 < poelcat> okay :)
13:00 < knurd> you move? we move?
13:00 < poelcat> i'll send unfinished items to fedora-test list for continued discussion
13:00 < poelcat> knurd: take it away
13:00 < poelcat> :)
13:00 < poelcat> all yorus