[Pulp-dev] Dealing with our redmine backlog

[David Davis]

We talked this over some more today at the pulpcore meeting. I think we're
going to instead go through the issues and close them out manually. I've
scheduled a 2 hour session for a week from Monday. Please send me an email
if you'd like to attend.

David


On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 12:47 PM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com> wrote:

> Per our conversation this morning, I have created a spreadsheet of the 100
> oldest issues at NEW in the Pulp project. I filtered out issues that were
> tagged with Katello or that had a BZ attached to them.
>
> As for which issues to keep open: I added a column called "Champion" where
> people could add their name if they want to champion an issue, push it
> forward, and ensure that it could be picked up and worked on. Any issue
> that has a Champion attached to it will be left at NEW; the rest will be
> closed as WONTFIX.
>
> I'll propose a deadline of September 1st before I close out the issues. As
> always, feedback is welcome.
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Dm1Z2phjJY1CThOD1zzBfwqt16SyO8AJ-ShkbBIRQKI/edit?usp=sharing
>
> David
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:44 PM Robin Chan <rchan at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> 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
>>
>> She/Her/Hers
>>
>> 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.
>> <https://www.redhat.com>
>>
>>
>>
>> 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
>>>>> - CLOSED-WON'TFIX?
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [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/20200818/cd60a919/attachment.htm>