[Pulp-dev] Dealing with our redmine backlog

Robin Chan rchan at redhat.com
Fri Aug 7 19:43:36 UTC 2020

I'd be OK with using time last edited or created being over some value (6
months) as an auto-close with a note to re-open. For older bug reports or
feature requests - if a user has lived without it for a long time without
contributing a fix, then some re-engagement to re-open an issue helps
provide some priority assessment.

Robin Chan


Satellite Software Engineering Manager - Pulp

Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com>

IRC: rchan

Red Hat respects your work life balance. Therefore there is no need to
answer this email out of your office hours.

On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 11:34 AM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com> wrote:

> After open floor, the consensus was to give all users the ability to
> reopen issues aside from dupes or completed/released. I've done that.
> I think we want to go through open issues and close them out or groom them
> regardless of what we decide about doing a mass close so I went ahead and
> added an agenda item to our pulpcore meeting.
> David
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 10:49 AM Tatiana Tereshchenko <ttereshc at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>> +1 to allow all users to re-open issues.
>> If ^, then +1 to closing as many backlog issues as seems needed.
>> We can close based on the date and then review manually items with
>> redmine issue number less than N - old ones, to see if they have recent
>> comments or just spam.
>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 6:08 PM Ina Panova <ipanova at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> --------
>>> Regards,
>>> Ina Panova
>>> Senior Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
>>> "Do not go where the path may lead,
>>>  go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
>>> On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 8:54 PM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> We've been discussing the possibility of closing issues in redmine due
>>>> to the overwhelming number of issues at NEW. Currently, we have 930 issues
>>>> at NEW and I think that exceeds our capacity to address each issue
>>>> individually.
>>>> The first item I want to bring up for discussion is expanding the
>>>> ability for users to reopen closed issues. Currently only authors can
>>>> reopen issues at CLOSED excluding CLOSED - DUPLICATE and CLOSED - COMPLETE.
>>>> Should we expand this to all redmine users?
>>> +1 to expand it to all users.
>>>> If we expand this permission, this should give us the ability to safely
>>>> close out issues that fit some criteria. I looked at the pulpcore issues
>>>> and limited the issues to just ones without a Katello tag or a BZ and that
>>>> were created before 2020[0]. This still leaves us with almost 300 NEW
>>>> issues in pulpcore which still seems unrealistic to go through. Any
>>>> thoughts on what criteria to use?
>>> We could also exclude issues that have Pulp2 tag.
>>> Even if we end up having 300 issues to process, I know that sounds a
>>> lot, but we can regularly dedicate 5 mins(timeboxed!) of our pulpcore team
>>> meeting, or open floor to go through. For some issues it is enough to read
>>> the title to make a decision.
>>> I *think* this might be a feasible idea, look how many and good
>>> improvements we did in redmine having it on the agenda for each open floor.
>>> Alsom, what will be the state of the issues we are going to mass close -
>>>> [0] It would be better to use updated at to scope issues but
>>>> unfortunately a lot of older issues have been updated recently due to spam
>>>> comment
>>>> David
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20200807/448f9714/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list