[Pulp-dev] redmine process for katello-integration-related issues

[David Davis]

Nitpick but I would use 'Katello' to be consistent with other tags. And
agreed that we should remove the Katello P tags. Other than that, LGTM.

David


On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 12:42 PM Justin Sherrill <jsherril at redhat.com> wrote:

> +1 to all of this!
> On 4/8/20 12:35 PM, Brian Bouterse wrote:
>
> Thanks for writing this up and sending! My only addition would be to also
> remove the P1, P2, P3 tags entirely after setting all tagged issues with
> 'katello' and setting their priorities based on the previous P1/P2/P3 label.
>
> Thank you!
>
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 12:32 PM Grant Gainey <ggainey at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey folks,
>>
>> As part of working with the katello upstream, we have been using a
>> mechanism for prioritizing pulp-issues in order to help keep the Katello
>> Gang unblocked. We have been using the 'Tags' field in an issue, and
>> marking things as Katello-P1/2/3, with P1 being "blocker for the next
>> release".
>>
>> As we move through releases, this is starting to break down - last
>> release's P2 is this release's P1. This was brought up for discussion in
>> today's integration meeting.
>>
>> In order to continue being able to prioritize work, we're proposing a
>> change to the process to make it more sustainable as releases go on. I
>> *think* I have captured the proposal effectively below - if I've missed
>> something vital, I'm sure someone who was in the meeting will expand on it:
>>
>>    - tag katello-related issues as 'katello'
>>    - use the milestone field to define the planned-pulp-release-version
>>    - use the Priority field to mark how important it is, *to katello*,
>>    to fix a bug NOW, as opposed to 'the day before the release is cut' (which
>>    in practice is likely to be  'blockers are critical, everything else is
>>    normal')
>>
>> This will make it easy to query redmine in a way that returns a
>> properly-ordered list, without some human having to go through and
>> group-change tags on multiple issues at once.
>>
>> Would appreciate more eyes on this, and especially input on what I might
>> have missed. We'd like to switch 'soon', so feedback before, say next
>> Wednesday 15-APR would be great!
>>
>> Thanks,
>> G
>> --
>> Grant Gainey
>> Principal Software Engineer, Red Hat System Management Engineering
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing listPulp-dev at redhat.comhttps://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/20200408/9ef0e807/attachment.htm>