FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-26-2010, 09:53 PM
"Jason L Tibbitts III"
 
Default New merge review tickets being opened

Some Red Hat employees are opening new merge review tickets for packages
which were in extras long before the big core-extras merge. It looks
like all of these packages are so old that the reviews predate the use
of Red Hat's bugzilla for the purpose, and so those reviews were either
done on the old mailing list or in the old fedora.us bugzilla (which I
believe has been lost).

No Fedora policy requires that these packages be re-reviewed. The
evidence seems to point to some Red Hat policy requiring review tickets
for these packages, although I can't seem to get a proper answer from
someone who actually knows. Given that the reviewers are currently
overburdened and are barely able to keep up with existing submissions,
plus the fact that we still have a few hundred of the original merge
review tickets still open, I don't think that adding more to the pile is
going to be remotely helpful. If there's a Red Hat policy which
requires this, then Red Hat should be taking care of this instead of
leaving it to the overburdened Fedora community. The fact that there's
been no communication about it only adds insult to injury.

I propose that the 'Product' on these tickets be changed to something
other than 'Fedora' so that they don't appear to be part of any Fedora
process. I'm happy to do that if someone can tell me which component to
use.

Note that I don't necessarily think it's a bad idea that old packages be
revisited at some point, but we just don't have the manpower to do that
right now.

- J<
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-27-2010, 09:09 PM
Bill Nottingham
 
Default New merge review tickets being opened

Jason L Tibbitts III (tibbs@math.uh.edu) said:
> Some Red Hat employees are opening new merge review tickets for packages
> which were in extras long before the big core-extras merge. It looks
> like all of these packages are so old that the reviews predate the use
> of Red Hat's bugzilla for the purpose, and so those reviews were either
> done on the old mailing list or in the old fedora.us bugzilla (which I
> believe has been lost).
>
> No Fedora policy requires that these packages be re-reviewed. The
> evidence seems to point to some Red Hat policy requiring review tickets
> for these packages, although I can't seem to get a proper answer from
> someone who actually knows.

There is a new internal process that encourages that packages have
existing Fedora reviews. This is likely a consequence of that, although
it's certainly never mentioned directly in the process. (I'd suspect that
there is likely to be some uptick in merge review activity as well.)

> Given that the reviewers are currently
> overburdened and are barely able to keep up with existing submissions,
> plus the fact that we still have a few hundred of the original merge
> review tickets still open, I don't think that adding more to the pile is
> going to be remotely helpful. If there's a Red Hat policy which
> requires this, then Red Hat should be taking care of this instead of
> leaving it to the overburdened Fedora community. The fact that there's
> been no communication about it only adds insult to injury.
>
> I propose that the 'Product' on these tickets be changed to something
> other than 'Fedora' so that they don't appear to be part of any Fedora
> process. I'm happy to do that if someone can tell me which component to
> use.

How so? They're reviews of Fedora packages. If the queue's not being
processed quickly, the queue won't be processed quickly. If these reviews
need quick attention, then I suspect resources will need to be assigned
to them. If they don't, then they won't. I'm not convinced that adding
12 packages to the queue (the current count of these) is anything to
worry about, given that we get more new submissions than that per
week already without any other controls.

Bill
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-27-2010, 10:49 PM
"Jason L Tibbitts III"
 
Default New merge review tickets being opened

>>>>> "BN" == Bill Nottingham <notting@redhat.com> writes:

BN> There is a new internal process that encourages that packages have
BN> existing Fedora reviews.

Please define "internal". If this is some Red Hat internal thing, don't
you think the community who is being asked to do this work should at
least be informed?

BN> They're reviews of Fedora packages.

Fedora doesn't have any policy which requires reviews of these
packages. Fedora doesn't have the manpower to do re-reviews of packages
at this time.

BN> If the queue's not being processed quickly, the queue won't be
BN> processed quickly.

And you don't see any negative effects from this? Really? What about
people with submissions just sitting around?

BN> If these reviews need quick attention, then I suspect resources will
BN> need to be assigned to them.

Assigned by whom? Again, if this is a Red Hat internal thing, please
handle it within Red Hat or please at least talk to the community about
it.

BN> I'm not convinced that adding 12 packages to the queue (the current
BN> count of these) is anything to worry about, given that we get more
BN> new submissions than that per week already without any other
BN> controls.

Because we get a lot of submissions we're buried under, throwing a bunch
of pointless ones on top won't hurt? Come on, at least get someone to
talk to us about this.

- J<
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-28-2010, 01:14 PM
"Paul W. Frields"
 
Default New merge review tickets being opened

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 05:49:07PM -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >>>>> "BN" == Bill Nottingham <notting@redhat.com> writes:
>
> BN> There is a new internal process that encourages that packages have
> BN> existing Fedora reviews.
>
> Please define "internal". If this is some Red Hat internal thing, don't
> you think the community who is being asked to do this work should at
> least be informed?
>
> BN> They're reviews of Fedora packages.
>
> Fedora doesn't have any policy which requires reviews of these
> packages. Fedora doesn't have the manpower to do re-reviews of packages
> at this time.
>
> BN> If the queue's not being processed quickly, the queue won't be
> BN> processed quickly.
>
> And you don't see any negative effects from this? Really? What about
> people with submissions just sitting around?
>
> BN> If these reviews need quick attention, then I suspect resources will
> BN> need to be assigned to them.
>
> Assigned by whom? Again, if this is a Red Hat internal thing, please
> handle it within Red Hat or please at least talk to the community about
> it.
>
> BN> I'm not convinced that adding 12 packages to the queue (the current
> BN> count of these) is anything to worry about, given that we get more
> BN> new submissions than that per week already without any other
> BN> controls.
>
> Because we get a lot of submissions we're buried under, throwing a bunch
> of pointless ones on top won't hurt? Come on, at least get someone to
> talk to us about this.

I've discussed this with the team that filed these reviews, and all
these bugs should now be assigned to Red Hat people, where they
properly belong. The intention was never to dump these reviews on
volunteers, but rather for the engineers in the process to collaborate
with each other on the reviews. The net benefit to Fedora is that
hopefully we get packages in Fedora the upstream that are
incrementally improved. So if you see that any of these new tickets
*aren't* assigned, please let the list know and either Bill or I will
get that taken care of immediately.

--
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
Where open source multiplies: http://opensource.com
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:27 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org