Planning for automatic assignment of bugs
Duncan <email@example.com> said:
> Jim Ramsay <firstname.lastname@example.org> posted 20080701112956.143dbd22@vrm378-02,
> excerpted below, on Tue, 01 Jul 2008 11:29:56 -0400:
> > Mark Loeser <email@example.com> wrote:
> >> Its a good idea, but since our users don't always provide useful
> >> reports, it seems like we are just shifting work around.
> > I'd suggest that this would /spread/ work around - Instead of a few
> > folks wrangling bugs, everyone would be doing it.
> > That said, I have no idea how many duplicate / incomplete bugs I have
> > never seen due to the wonderful work of the wranglers. In some ways it
> > would be a shame to lose that quality pre-reading of the bugs.
> Perhaps the best solution is to get the implementation in place, but not
> completely automate it. Put the tools there so if it looks right, all
> the wrangler needs to do is a single click, and it's auto-assigned, but
> that single click is still necessary so that a human actually gets to
> review things before doing the assignment.
> That would make it /much/ easier for the wranglers.
> If desired, a cron script or some such could then be setup to go thru and
> automatically assign anything that wasn't assigned yet and that hadn't
> been touched (no comments asking for more info, etc) for some period, say
> a week, just to catch anything that fell thru the cracks or if the
> wranglers all disappeared or went on strike/vacation/whatever. Then if
> folks ever suddenly find themselves inundated with "raw" bugs, it'd be a
> serious indication that the wranglers needed some help.
I like this idea. It would address my concerns.
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
email - mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://www.halcy0n.com