Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Launchpad User (http://www.linux-archive.org/launchpad-user/)
-   -   Bug Expiration Criteria (http://www.linux-archive.org/launchpad-user/101619-bug-expiration-criteria.html)

Brian Murray 06-05-2008 11:55 PM

Bug Expiration Criteria
 
I was reviewing bugs that can expire in Ubuntu and became curious about
one of the expiry criteria[0] - 'it is not marked as a duplicate of
another bug'.

What is the logic and thought process behind that criteria? I'd think
that the bug with duplicates is the one that shouldn't be eligible for
expiry.

[0] https://help.launchpad.net/BugExpiry

Thanks,
--
Brian Murray
--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

"Martin Pool" 06-06-2008 12:53 AM

Bug Expiration Criteria
 
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:55 AM, Brian Murray <brian@canonical.com> wrote:
> I was reviewing bugs that can expire in Ubuntu and became curious about
> one of the expiry criteria[0] - 'it is not marked as a duplicate of
> another bug'.
>
> What is the logic and thought process behind that criteria? I'd think
> that the bug with duplicates is the one that shouldn't be eligible for
> expiry.

I think the reasoning is that once a bug is marked as a duplicate, it
no longer has a status of its own, therefore it's impossible for it to
expire.

--
Martin <http://launchpad.net/~mbp/>

--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

Graham Binns 06-06-2008 08:06 AM

Bug Expiration Criteria
 
On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 10:53:42AM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:55 AM, Brian Murray <brian@canonical.com> wrote:
> > I was reviewing bugs that can expire in Ubuntu and became curious about
> > one of the expiry criteria[0] - 'it is not marked as a duplicate of
> > another bug'.
> >
> > What is the logic and thought process behind that criteria? I'd think
> > that the bug with duplicates is the one that shouldn't be eligible for
> > expiry.
>
> I think the reasoning is that once a bug is marked as a duplicate, it
> no longer has a status of its own, therefore it's impossible for it to
> expire.
>

That's exactly right.

However, Brian has a point. We automatically mark duplicate bugs as
invalid anyway, so they can't be considered for expiration because of
that, too.

Perhaps we should remove the reference to bugs which are duplicates if
it's going to confuse people.

--
Graham
--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

"Caroline Ford" 06-06-2008 08:34 AM

Bug Expiration Criteria
 
2008/6/6 Graham Binns <graham.binns@canonical.com>:

>
> However, Brian has a point. We automatically mark duplicate bugs as
> invalid anyway, so they can't be considered for expiration because of
> that, too.

Some teams do (eg desktop team) most teams don't.


Caroline

--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

Graham Binns 06-06-2008 08:48 AM

Bug Expiration Criteria
 
On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 09:34:45AM +0100, Caroline Ford wrote:
> 2008/6/6 Graham Binns <graham.binns@canonical.com>:
>
> >
> > However, Brian has a point. We automatically mark duplicate bugs as
> > invalid anyway, so they can't be considered for expiration because of
> > that, too.
>
> Some teams do (eg desktop team) most teams don't.

I meant Launchpad does, but I was wrong (which'll teach me not to
respond to emails before I've had my coffee). Thanks for pointing that
out.

So the wording in the wiki document is correct, but it perhaps needs to
be better explained. I've updated the wiki page to explain what Martin
said upthread.

Cheers,

Graham

--
Graham Binns
http://launchpad.net/~gmb
--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

Christian Robottom Reis 06-06-2008 10:31 AM

Bug Expiration Criteria
 
On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 04:55:49PM -0700, Brian Murray wrote:
> I was reviewing bugs that can expire in Ubuntu and became curious about
> one of the expiry criteria[0] - 'it is not marked as a duplicate of
> another bug'.

The main rationale for not expiring duplicate bugs was actually public
outcry when we ran the expiration script for the first time. But does it
really make sense to mark a duplicate expired (generating email, etc) if
the duplicate doesn't really have a status?

(The only reason a duplicate status is even displayed on the bugtask
page is to assist in the process of unduplicating it, something which I
think is actually an overcompensation, but since nobody's complained
we've left it as is.)
--
Christian Robottom Reis | http://async.com.br/~kiko/ | [+55 16] 3376 0125

--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

Bjorn Tillenius 06-06-2008 10:48 AM

Bug Expiration Criteria
 
On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 07:31:09AM -0300, Christian Robottom Reis wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 04:55:49PM -0700, Brian Murray wrote:
> > I was reviewing bugs that can expire in Ubuntu and became curious about
> > one of the expiry criteria[0] - 'it is not marked as a duplicate of
> > another bug'.
>
> The main rationale for not expiring duplicate bugs was actually public
> outcry when we ran the expiration script for the first time. But does it
> really make sense to mark a duplicate expired (generating email, etc) if
> the duplicate doesn't really have a status?

No, I don't think it makes sense to mark such a bug as a duplicate.
Although, I think that criteria is mainly an internal one, since
internally the duplicate has a status. Externally, the bug doesn't have
a status, or is basically the same bug as the master bug. Just as we
don't change the status of the duplicate bug explicitly when the master
bug changes, we don't expire the duplicate bug, explicitly, when the
master bug expires.

I don't think we need to list this criteria on the wiki page.


Regards,

Bjorn

--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

Christian Robottom Reis 06-06-2008 09:01 PM

Bug Expiration Criteria
 
On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 01:48:19PM +0300, Bjorn Tillenius wrote:
> > The main rationale for not expiring duplicate bugs was actually public
> > outcry when we ran the expiration script for the first time. But does it
> > really make sense to mark a duplicate expired (generating email, etc) if
> > the duplicate doesn't really have a status?
>
> No, I don't think it makes sense to mark such a bug as a duplicate.
> Although, I think that criteria is mainly an internal one, since
> internally the duplicate has a status. Externally, the bug doesn't have
> a status, or is basically the same bug as the master bug. Just as we
> don't change the status of the duplicate bug explicitly when the master
> bug changes, we don't expire the duplicate bug, explicitly, when the
> master bug expires.

Right.

> I don't think we need to list this criteria on the wiki page.

Well, it might be confusing to say it, and it might be confusing to omit
it, so maybe it's best to explain why we don't do it?
--
Christian Robottom Reis | http://async.com.br/~kiko/ | [+55 16] 3376 0125

--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

Brian Murray 06-06-2008 09:28 PM

Bug Expiration Criteria
 
On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 06:01:46PM -0300, Christian Robottom Reis wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 01:48:19PM +0300, Bjorn Tillenius wrote:
> > > The main rationale for not expiring duplicate bugs was actually public
> > > outcry when we ran the expiration script for the first time. But does it
> > > really make sense to mark a duplicate expired (generating email, etc) if
> > > the duplicate doesn't really have a status?
> >
> > No, I don't think it makes sense to mark such a bug as a duplicate.
> > Although, I think that criteria is mainly an internal one, since
> > internally the duplicate has a status. Externally, the bug doesn't have
> > a status, or is basically the same bug as the master bug. Just as we
> > don't change the status of the duplicate bug explicitly when the master
> > bug changes, we don't expire the duplicate bug, explicitly, when the
> > master bug expires.
>
> Right.
>
> > I don't think we need to list this criteria on the wiki page.
>
> Well, it might be confusing to say it, and it might be confusing to omit
> it, so maybe it's best to explain why we don't do it?

I've an understanding of why duplicates do not expire now, thanks!
However, one topic I was trying to raise and might not have done well
is:

Should bugs with duplicates be eligible for expiration?

--
Brian Murray
--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users

Christian Robottom Reis 06-06-2008 09:30 PM

Bug Expiration Criteria
 
On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 02:28:30PM -0700, Brian Murray wrote:
> > Well, it might be confusing to say it, and it might be confusing to omit
> > it, so maybe it's best to explain why we don't do it?
>
> I've an understanding of why duplicates do not expire now, thanks!
> However, one topic I was trying to raise and might not have done well
> is:
>
> Should bugs with duplicates be eligible for expiration?

I guess the /with/ there was a bit understated. I am not sure of the
answer, though. In a way you want them to, because it could be a bug
that affected a variety of users but no longer does; on the other hand,
we can't really detect whether activity in the duplicates occurred.
Maybe it's safer to exclude them.

How many are in this situation today, Brian?
--
Christian Robottom Reis | http://async.com.br/~kiko/ | [+55 16] 3376 0125

--
launchpad-users mailing list
launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:49 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.