[Pulp-dev] Pulp2 Bug Backlog Closing?

Brian Bouterse bbouters at redhat.com
Wed Apr 3 21:27:54 UTC 2019


On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 5:23 PM Austin Macdonald <austin at redhat.com> wrote:

> I think if we close a lot of them, closed issues will be very difficult to
> find with ~4500 bugs (open and closed). I've been spending some time
> combing the backlog recently, and I'm compiling lists of bugs that I think
> can be closed. What I am also finding are tickets that could reasonably be
> updated for Pulp 3. IMO, these tickets are common enough that it would be
> worth our time to consider them.
>

I think this list would be great. Can we start a shared list somewhere for
backlog items we do want to keep?


> Of course, going through the enormous backlog will be very time consuming.
> If we agree that there is too much value to close the lot of them, then
> AFAICT the only path forward is to coordinate the effort and move through
> it over time.
>

This is my concern mainly. I don't know how to go through 1125 tickets.
Also, I am also partly concerned with an outcome where the Pulp3 issues
contain a historical record of pulp2 requests "ported" to pulp3. If the
reporter or stakeholder isn't around to advocate for a fix or feature
themselves, then I believe we can serve the current users best by focusing
on those things that are actively being requested (newly file'd issues).

Still, if you have a list of items and they make sense to port we should do
so.


> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 5:22 PM Austin Macdonald <austin at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> I think if we close a lot of them, closed issues will be very difficult
>> to find with ~4500 bugs (open and closed). I've been spending some time
>> combing the backlog recently, and I'm compiling lists of bugs that I think
>> can be closed. What I am also finding are tickets that could reasonably be
>> updated for Pulp 3. IMO, these tickets are common enough that it would be
>> worth our time to consider them.
>>
>> Of course, going through the enormous backlog will be very time
>> consuming. If we agree that there is too much value to close the lot of
>> them, then AFAICT the only path forward is to coordinate the effort and
>> move through it over time.
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 5:06 PM Brian Bouterse <bbouters at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> As Pulp2 approaches the maintenance mode we have a large number of Pulp2
>>> bugs open. A query [0] shows 1125 open Pulp2 bugs alone as of just now. We
>>> will likely address a small set of these before Pulp2 reaches its final
>>> release. What can we do to bring transparency into what will versus won't
>>> be fixed for Pulp2?
>>>
>>> The most reasonable option I can think to propose is a mass-close of the
>>> Pulp2 bugs except for those that we are actively working or planning to
>>> start work soon on. Overall I believe Pulp2 is nearing a point that if we
>>> aren't actively working or planning something for it we won't want to leave
>>> it open on the "Pulp 2 backlog ". Bugs accidentally closed could be
>>> reopened without much trouble probably.
>>>
>>> What do you think about the of a close-all-but-active Pulp2 bugs idea?
>>> How would you coordinate such an effort?
>>>
>>> [0]: https://tinyurl.com/y289wx5p
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Brian
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20190403/5f47ab70/attachment.htm>


More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list