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

Grant Gainey ggainey at redhat.com
Wed Apr 22 23:12:05 UTC 2020 

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 6:17 PM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com> wrote:

> A couple observations: the 3.3[0] and 3.4[1] milestones already exist in
> redmine. Also, you won't be able to assign any of the MODIFIED issues to
> 3.3 because they're all plugin issues and the 3.3 milestone is exclusive to
> pulpcore. IMHO, I probably wouldn't assign any issues to any milestones. I
> think it would be worse having an issue on the wrong milestone than it
> being unassigned.
>

If pulpcore is the only thing that has the version-milestones, then we're
at a dead stop. The whole point of the initial process proposal, was that
"milestone" would be able to completely replace the Katello-PX tags as a
way for Katello to tell us what they needed/expected when; if that's only
useful for pulpcore, then we have missed the mark, since the tags are used
cross-organizationally.

If you look at the list of open-issues
<https://pulp.plan.io/issues?c%5B%5D=project&c%5B%5D=tracker&c%5B%5D=status&c%5B%5D=priority&c%5B%5D=subject&c%5B%5D=author&c%5B%5D=assigned_to&c%5B%5D=cf_3&c%5B%5D=cf_7&f%5B%5D=status_id&f%5B%5D=cf_7&f%5B%5D=&group_by=&op%5Bcf_7%5D=%3D&op%5Bstatus_id%5D=o&set_filter=1&sort=project%2Cstatus%2Ccf_7&t%5B%5D=&utf8=%E2%9C%93&v%5Bcf_7%5D%5B%5D=Katello-P1&v%5Bcf_7%5D%5B%5D=Katello-P2&v%5Bcf_7%5D%5B%5D=Katello-P3>
currently tagged with Katello-PX tags, you'll see more than pulpcore in
there.

>From ttereshc's summary email:

>
>    - 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*
>
>
>    - remove the existing Katello P1/2/3 tags
>
>  If we can't mark non-pulpcore-issues with "planned-pulp-release-version",
then this proposal is DOA.

Clearly, we need some more discussion! Anyone else want to join in?

G


> That would leave the process somewhat simpler:
>
> 1. Create a Katello tag and assign it to all Katello-PX issues
> 2. Set the priority to high for P1 issues, medium for P2 issues, and low
> for P3 issues
> 3. Optionally, add open P2 issues to 3.4 milestone
> 4. Remove all Katello-PX tags
>
> And then Katello can just add the 15 issues at NEW/ASSIGNED to a milestone
> as they see fit: https://pulp.plan.io/issues?query_id=113.
>
> [0] https://pulp.plan.io/versions/83
> [1] https://pulp.plan.io/versions/88
>
> David
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 5:15 PM Grant Gainey <ggainey at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey folks,
>>
>> To close the loop on this:
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 6:26 AM Tatiana Tereshchenko <ttereshc at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 and to the nitpick as well
>>>
>>>    - 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*
>>>    - remove the existing Katello P1/2/3 tags
>>>
>>> I am working to actually make these changes, and need a quick check on
>> specifics.
>>
>> Right now there are 29 open issues with a Katello-PX tag. 14 of these are
>> in MODIFIED/P1, all against various plugins (ansible, certguard, and rpm)
>> I propose to do the following (order matters):
>>
>>    1. create milestones for *pulp-3.0*, *pulp-3.4*, *pulp-3.5*, and
>>    *pulp-3.6* (thinking both ahead and behind a little)
>>    2. create a *Katello* tag
>>    3. anything in MODIFIED gets the *3.3* milestone.
>>    4. Remaining open katello-P2 issues get a *3.4* milestone.
>>    5. Remaining open katello-P3 issues get a *3.5* milestone
>>    6. open *Katello-P1* issues get a *High* priority
>>    7. all other open issues get a *Normal* priority
>>    8. closed Katello-PX issues get the *3.0 *milestone
>>    9. tag all Katello-PX issues, open or closed, with *Katello*
>>    10. remove all Katello-PX tags on anything open or closed
>>    11. This will leave us with 29 open issues using the new process, *which
>>    will need Priority and Milestone triage*
>>
>> Does that catch everything we want from this, going forward? I'd like a
>> quick turnaround here so we can make sure we are working on 3.4 items in
>> the right order.
>>
>> G
>>
>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 6:47 PM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
>>
>

-- 
Grant Gainey
Principal Software Engineer, Red Hat System Management Engineering
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20200422/913845dc/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list