* Basic questions about the triage process @ 2015-12-28 5:39 Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-28 8:58 ` Michael Albinus ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Andrew Hyatt @ 2015-12-28 5:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org, jwiegley [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1220 bytes --] John Wiegley recently put out a call on Twitter for people to help with the closing out bugs against Emacs 25. Seems like a real problem. I'd like to help! But, pardon me for my ignorance, but I'm a bit lost as to how to get started. For any bug triage, there's a few necessary steps you have to learn: 1) How to identify the bugs to be triaged. I actually don't know the set of bugs you are interested in. All the open ones? Just the ones blocking emacs 25? If I'm using the debbugs package, what's the command I use to display just the set we're interested in? 2) How to triage each bug. In this case, the basic task if clear: just try to reproduce against emacs 25. But if it doesn't reproduce, what then? Do we close the bug? I downloaded and started using the debbugs package, but AFAICT, it's read-only. Seems like it should be obvious, but I can't figure out how to close a bug in either debbugs package, or in the web interface. Also, what if it does reproduce? I guess just a reply saying that it reproduces? Or does it need to be tagged in some way? Sorry, maybe there was a document that explains this all, and I missed it. If there's isn't such a document, I think it'd be pretty helpful. [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1435 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-28 5:39 Basic questions about the triage process Andrew Hyatt @ 2015-12-28 8:58 ` Michael Albinus 2015-12-28 16:25 ` Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-28 20:24 ` John Wiegley 2015-12-28 23:55 ` Xue Fuqiao 2 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Michael Albinus @ 2015-12-28 8:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Hyatt; +Cc: jwiegley, emacs-devel@gnu.org Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: Hi Andrew, > 1) How to identify the bugs to be triaged. I actually don't know the > set of bugs you are interested in. All the open ones? Just the ones > blocking emacs 25? If I'm using the debbugs package, what's the > command I use to display just the set we're interested in? debbugs on elpa is under rewrite these days, so I haven't pushed yet a new version 0.8. Maybe you could download it from the elpa git? If you want to see just the open bugs, accept all default settings when calling "M-x debbugs-gnu". You will see all open bugs with severity serious, important or normal. 2142 lines just now. You can filter out the closed-but-not-archived-yet bugs by hitting "x" (1906 lines). Hitting "x" again, all bug reports are shown again. If you want to filter the bugs, type "/ regexp". The regexp matches strings in the report buffer. If you, for example, want to see all bugs with the string "tramp" in the title, type "/ tramp". This gives you 14 lines. Typing "w" returns to the full list of bugs. If you type "R", you will see all bugs blocking the next Emacs release. 48 lines. You can combine it with a further "x", which results in 33 not closed bugs blocking Emacs 25.1 release. These are the most interesting bugs to be fixed. > 2) How to triage each bug. In this case, the basic task if clear: just > try to reproduce against emacs 25. But if it doesn't reproduce, what > then? Do we close the bug? I downloaded and started using the debbugs > package, but AFAICT, it's read-only. Seems like it should be obvious, > but I can't figure out how to close a bug in either debbugs package, > or in the web interface. If your cursor points to the bug line you want to handle, type "C". This starts a control message to be sent to the debbugs server. Use <TAB> for completion of possible actions. The debbugs elpa package comes with an info manual. Try (info "(debbugs-ug)") Some commands I've mentioned above are not documented in debbugs 0.7. See the info manual from the elpa repo. The file debbugs-gnu.el explains the keys also in its Commentary section. Best regards, Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-28 8:58 ` Michael Albinus @ 2015-12-28 16:25 ` Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-28 17:35 ` Michael Albinus 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Andrew Hyatt @ 2015-12-28 16:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michael Albinus; +Cc: jwiegley, emacs-devel@gnu.org [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2629 bytes --] Thanks Michael, this is a really nice summary. One additional question: when looking at the open bugs, how do I know which ones have already been already tested against Emacs 25? I can see the Emacs 25 blockers, but probably not all the bugs that are reproducible in Emacs 25 are severe enough to be blockers, right? On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 3:58 AM Michael Albinus <michael.albinus@gmx.de> wrote: > Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: > > Hi Andrew, > > > 1) How to identify the bugs to be triaged. I actually don't know the > > set of bugs you are interested in. All the open ones? Just the ones > > blocking emacs 25? If I'm using the debbugs package, what's the > > command I use to display just the set we're interested in? > > debbugs on elpa is under rewrite these days, so I haven't pushed yet a > new version 0.8. Maybe you could download it from the elpa git? > > If you want to see just the open bugs, accept all default settings when > calling "M-x debbugs-gnu". You will see all open bugs with severity > serious, important or normal. 2142 lines just now. > > You can filter out the closed-but-not-archived-yet bugs by hitting "x" > (1906 lines). Hitting "x" again, all bug reports are shown again. > > If you want to filter the bugs, type "/ regexp". The regexp matches > strings in the report buffer. If you, for example, want to see all bugs > with the string "tramp" in the title, type "/ tramp". This gives you 14 > lines. Typing "w" returns to the full list of bugs. > > If you type "R", you will see all bugs blocking the next Emacs > release. 48 lines. You can combine it with a further "x", which results > in 33 not closed bugs blocking Emacs 25.1 release. These are the most > interesting bugs to be fixed. > > > 2) How to triage each bug. In this case, the basic task if clear: just > > try to reproduce against emacs 25. But if it doesn't reproduce, what > > then? Do we close the bug? I downloaded and started using the debbugs > > package, but AFAICT, it's read-only. Seems like it should be obvious, > > but I can't figure out how to close a bug in either debbugs package, > > or in the web interface. > > If your cursor points to the bug line you want to handle, type "C". This > starts a control message to be sent to the debbugs server. Use <TAB> for > completion of possible actions. > > The debbugs elpa package comes with an info manual. > Try (info "(debbugs-ug)") Some commands I've mentioned above are not > documented in debbugs 0.7. See the info manual from the elpa repo. > > The file debbugs-gnu.el explains the keys also in its Commentary > section. > > Best regards, Michael. > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3297 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-28 16:25 ` Andrew Hyatt @ 2015-12-28 17:35 ` Michael Albinus 0 siblings, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Michael Albinus @ 2015-12-28 17:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Hyatt; +Cc: jwiegley, emacs-devel@gnu.org Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: Hi Andrew, > One additional question: when looking at the open bugs, how do I know > which ones have already been already tested against Emacs 25? I can > see the Emacs 25 blockers, but probably not all the bugs that are > reproducible in Emacs 25 are severe enough to be blockers, right? AFAIK, there's no attribute telling towards which Emacs version a bug has been tested. In the subject line, you see usually the Emacs version a bug has been reported against. In theory, there is the `found-versions' attribute of a bug. But this is not updated in practice, once a bug has been tested with another Emacs version but the initally reported one. So you need to consult the corresponding emails (you get them via <RET>, when the cursor is on the bug line). Best regards, Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-28 5:39 Basic questions about the triage process Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-28 8:58 ` Michael Albinus @ 2015-12-28 20:24 ` John Wiegley 2015-12-29 5:40 ` Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-28 23:55 ` Xue Fuqiao 2 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: John Wiegley @ 2015-12-28 20:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Hyatt; +Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1705 bytes --] >>>>> Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: > 1) How to identify the bugs to be triaged. I actually don't know the set of > bugs you are interested in. All the open ones? Just the ones blocking emacs > 25? If I'm using the debbugs package, what's the command I use to display > just the set we're interested in? There are really two sets of bugs we'd like to pay attention to: 1. Those blocking the release of Emacs 25. Clearly, we can't release until this reaches zero. 2. All the open bugs, especially the oldest ones. If they don't reproduce against emacs-25 anymore, we'd like to mark them closed as fixed in that release. #1 is a fairly small list, so just getting more information on those bugs so that the developers know how to proceed next is what's important. #2 is a large list, but would help out the Emacs project by clearing out things we don't need to pay attention to anymore. > Also, what if it does reproduce? I guess just a reply saying that it > reproduces? Or does it need to be tagged in some way? A comment would be valuable, and if what you saw still matches the description of the problem. > Sorry, maybe there was a document that explains this all, and I missed it. > If there's isn't such a document, I think it'd be pretty helpful. Perhaps we do need a targeted document for on-boarding bug herders. If, while you're learning this process, you could keep some notes on what helped you to get started, Andrew, that could become the start of such a document. -- John Wiegley GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F http://newartisans.com 60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2 [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 629 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-28 20:24 ` John Wiegley @ 2015-12-29 5:40 ` Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-29 17:12 ` Eli Zaretskii 2016-01-07 21:04 ` Phillip Lord 0 siblings, 2 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Andrew Hyatt @ 2015-12-29 5:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1931 bytes --] John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com> writes: >>>>>> Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: > >> 1) How to identify the bugs to be triaged. I actually don't know the set of >> bugs you are interested in. All the open ones? Just the ones blocking emacs >> 25? If I'm using the debbugs package, what's the command I use to display >> just the set we're interested in? > > There are really two sets of bugs we'd like to pay attention to: > > 1. Those blocking the release of Emacs 25. Clearly, we can't release until > this reaches zero. > > 2. All the open bugs, especially the oldest ones. If they don't reproduce > against emacs-25 anymore, we'd like to mark them closed as fixed in that > release. > > #1 is a fairly small list, so just getting more information on those bugs so > that the developers know how to proceed next is what's important. > > #2 is a large list, but would help out the Emacs project by clearing out > things we don't need to pay attention to anymore. > >> Also, what if it does reproduce? I guess just a reply saying that it >> reproduces? Or does it need to be tagged in some way? > > A comment would be valuable, and if what you saw still matches the description > of the problem. > >> Sorry, maybe there was a document that explains this all, and I missed it. >> If there's isn't such a document, I think it'd be pretty helpful. > > Perhaps we do need a targeted document for on-boarding bug herders. If, while > you're learning this process, you could keep some notes on what helped you to > get started, Andrew, that could become the start of such a document. I've put together my notes into a file I stuck in the admin section. I'm attaching it as a patch. Feedback would be welcome, of course. I'm guessing there's a few other things we'd like to put into this document as well, but I won't attempt to go beyond just the basic triage procedure we've discussed in this thread. [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #2: 0001-Add-a-file-detailing-how-to-triage-bugs.patch --] [-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 3448 bytes --] From 6ee81d1ac65c49d07c104855b66a1f47a53a4c8f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 00:36:09 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] Add a file detailing how to triage bugs. --- admin/notes/triage | 55 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 55 insertions(+) create mode 100644 admin/notes/triage diff --git a/admin/notes/triage b/admin/notes/triage new file mode 100644 index 0000000..f3aa6ad --- /dev/null +++ b/admin/notes/triage @@ -0,0 +1,55 @@ +HOW TO DO TRIAGE EMACS BUGS -*- outline -*- + +This document just describes the procedure of triaging bugs, for +information on how to work with the bug tracker, see the bugtracker +file in the same directory. + +* The what and why of bug triage + +Bugs have to be regularly looked at and acted upon. Not all bugs are +critical, but at the least, each bug needs to be regularly re-reviewed +to make sure it is still reproducible. A large backlog of bugs is +disheartening to the developers, and a culture of ignoring bugs is +harmful to users, who expect software that works. + +The process of going through open bugs and acting on them is called +bug triage. This document will go through the standard process of +triaging bugs. + +* Bug backlog triage procedure + +The goal of this triage is to prune down the list of old bugs, closing +the ones that are not reproducible on the current release. + + 1. To start, enter debbugs mode (either debbugs-gnu or debbugs-org), and + accept the default list option of bugs that have severity serious, + important, or normal. + 2. This will also show closed bugs that have yet to be archived. You can + filter these out in debbugs-gnu with "x" (debbugs-gnu-toggle-suppress). + 3. For each bug, do the following: + - Read the mail thread for the bug. Find out if anyone has been able to + reproduce this on the current release. + - If someone has been able to, then your work is finished for this bug. + - If no one has mentioned being able to reproduce on the current release, + read the bug description and attempt to reproduce on an emacs started + with "emacs -Q" (the goal is to not let our personal configs interfere + with bug testing). + - If you can reproduce, then reply on the thread (either on the original + message, or anywhere you find appropriate) that you can reproduce this on + the current release. + - If you can't reproduce, and the bug is older than 2 years old, reply on + the thread that you cannot reproduce this on the current release, you + will be closing this as unreproducible. Add that if anyone can reproduce + it, please re-open the bug. After sending that mail, send a control + message on debbugs to set the status to "doneunreproducable". + - If you can't reproduce, but the bug is newer than 2 years old, state that + you can't reproduce it on the current release, ask if they can try again + against the current release. Wait a few weeks for their reply - if they + can reproduce it, then that's great, otherwise close as + "doneunreproducable". + 4. Your changes will take some time to take effect. After a period of minutes + to hours, you will get a mail telling you the control message has been + processed. At this point, you and everyone else can see your changes. + + + -- 2.4.9 (Apple Git-60) ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-29 5:40 ` Andrew Hyatt @ 2015-12-29 17:12 ` Eli Zaretskii 2015-12-30 0:22 ` Andrew Hyatt 2016-01-07 21:04 ` Phillip Lord 1 sibling, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2015-12-29 17:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Hyatt; +Cc: emacs-devel > From: Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> > Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 00:40:08 -0500 > > I've put together my notes into a file I stuck in the admin section. Thanks. A few comments below. > +* The what and why of bug triage > + > +Bugs have to be regularly looked at and acted upon. Not all bugs are > +critical, but at the least, each bug needs to be regularly re-reviewed > +to make sure it is still reproducible. A large backlog of bugs is > +disheartening to the developers, and a culture of ignoring bugs is > +harmful to users, who expect software that works. This paragraph is probably better to move to CONTRIBUTE. It should point to this file, which in turn should describe only the triage itself, not its importance. > +The goal of this triage is to prune down the list of old bugs, closing > +the ones that are not reproducible on the current release. I think triage is more than that: it should also strive to classify the bugs according to their importance. > + 1. To start, enter debbugs mode (either debbugs-gnu or debbugs-org), and > + accept the default list option of bugs that have severity serious, > + important, or normal. > + 2. This will also show closed bugs that have yet to be archived. You can > + filter these out in debbugs-gnu with "x" (debbugs-gnu-toggle-suppress). Triage can be done via a Web browser as well. I suggest to mention debbugs-gnu as one possibility, perhaps the preferred one, but not the only one. > + 3. For each bug, do the following: > + - Read the mail thread for the bug. Find out if anyone has been able to > + reproduce this on the current release. > + - If someone has been able to, then your work is finished for this bug. Again, having the bug reproducible is not the end of triage, at least not in general. It is a good idea to use your judgment to decide whether the bug is really a bug (and if so, how important it is), a request for a new feature, or simply a rant. debbugs.gnu.org supports tags for recording the results of this process; it would be good if at least some bugs got tagged accordingly as result of the triage. > + - If you can reproduce, then reply on the thread (either on the original > + message, or anywhere you find appropriate) that you can reproduce this on > + the current release. Here, I'd suggest to request adding relevant details. Sometimes bug reports don't provide backtraces, or don't even describe the recipe in sufficient detail. If the triage supplies these details, let alone if you can come up with a simpler reproducer, adding this information will be of great value to those who will come after you to try resolving the bug. Also, if the description isn't detailed enough, it might be a good idea to ask for more detailed description, because the stuff that was left out might be the reason for not being able to reproduce the bug in the first place. > + - If you can't reproduce, but the bug is newer than 2 years old, state that > + you can't reproduce it on the current release, ask if they can try again > + against the current release. There's a tag for that, I believe. > + 4. Your changes will take some time to take effect. After a period of minutes > + to hours, you will get a mail telling you the control message has been > + processed. At this point, you and everyone else can see your changes. That mail can also say there were errors, something to mention here, I think. Thanks again for working on this (and on the triage itself). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-29 17:12 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2015-12-30 0:22 ` Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-30 17:21 ` Eli Zaretskii 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Andrew Hyatt @ 2015-12-30 0:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: emacs-devel [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4713 bytes --] Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes: >> From: Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> >> Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 00:40:08 -0500 >> >> I've put together my notes into a file I stuck in the admin section. > > Thanks. A few comments below. > >> +* The what and why of bug triage >> + >> +Bugs have to be regularly looked at and acted upon. Not all bugs are >> +critical, but at the least, each bug needs to be regularly re-reviewed >> +to make sure it is still reproducible. A large backlog of bugs is >> +disheartening to the developers, and a culture of ignoring bugs is >> +harmful to users, who expect software that works. > > This paragraph is probably better to move to CONTRIBUTE. It should > point to this file, which in turn should describe only the triage > itself, not its importance. OK, I've done so (see the modified patch I've attached). This probably needs a bit more work since we want to talk about more kinds of triage as well (notably the triaging of new bugs), eventually. > >> +The goal of this triage is to prune down the list of old bugs, closing >> +the ones that are not reproducible on the current release. > > I think triage is more than that: it should also strive to classify > the bugs according to their importance. Yes, but isn't that more about triaging new bugs? I'm not writing about that yet - but if someone tells me how to triage new bugs I'm happy to write it up. > >> + 1. To start, enter debbugs mode (either debbugs-gnu or debbugs-org), and >> + accept the default list option of bugs that have severity serious, >> + important, or normal. >> + 2. This will also show closed bugs that have yet to be archived. You can >> + filter these out in debbugs-gnu with "x" (debbugs-gnu-toggle-suppress). > > Triage can be done via a Web browser as well. I suggest to mention > debbugs-gnu as one possibility, perhaps the preferred one, but not the > only one. Done. > >> + 3. For each bug, do the following: >> + - Read the mail thread for the bug. Find out if anyone has been able to >> + reproduce this on the current release. >> + - If someone has been able to, then your work is finished for this bug. > > Again, having the bug reproducible is not the end of triage, at least > not in general. It is a good idea to use your judgment to decide > whether the bug is really a bug (and if so, how important it is), a > request for a new feature, or simply a rant. debbugs.gnu.org supports > tags for recording the results of this process; it would be good if at > least some bugs got tagged accordingly as result of the triage. Again, I think this right, but for new bug triage which I haven't written up yet. For the bug backlog, I'm assuming someone has already taken a pass at each bug. > >> + - If you can reproduce, then reply on the thread (either on the original >> + message, or anywhere you find appropriate) that you can reproduce this on >> + the current release. > > Here, I'd suggest to request adding relevant details. Sometimes bug > reports don't provide backtraces, or don't even describe the recipe in > sufficient detail. If the triage supplies these details, let alone if > you can come up with a simpler reproducer, adding this information > will be of great value to those who will come after you to try > resolving the bug. > > Also, if the description isn't detailed enough, it might be a good > idea to ask for more detailed description, because the stuff that was > left out might be the reason for not being able to reproduce the bug > in the first place. Done (although I split this up into two parts - one new bullet point, another as part of the text on what to do if you can reproduce the issue). > >> + - If you can't reproduce, but the bug is newer than 2 years old, state that >> + you can't reproduce it on the current release, ask if they can try again >> + against the current release. > > There's a tag for that, I believe. We can just use the "unreproducible" tag. Sounds like a good idea. I'll add that. > >> + 4. Your changes will take some time to take effect. After a period of minutes >> + to hours, you will get a mail telling you the control message has been >> + processed. At this point, you and everyone else can see your changes. > > That mail can also say there were errors, something to mention here, I > think. Mentioned, but I'm a bit at a loss on what to say if there were errors. > > Thanks again for working on this (and on the triage itself). No problem. I've also removed, by popular demand, the distinction between pre-and-post 2 years old. Now we'll always just ask first. I've also fixed a few spelling and grammar errors. [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #2: Version 2 of triage notes patch --] [-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 3928 bytes --] From 3e496267725a6a44e32439fe8934ebda5a33f150 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 00:36:09 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] Add a file detailing how to triage bugs. Further changes in reponse to Eli's mail. --- CONTRIBUTE | 9 +++++++++ admin/notes/triage | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 53 insertions(+) create mode 100644 admin/notes/triage diff --git a/CONTRIBUTE b/CONTRIBUTE index b385d68..6983df5 100644 --- a/CONTRIBUTE +++ b/CONTRIBUTE @@ -222,6 +222,15 @@ the tracker with the corresponding bugs/issues. GNU ELPA has a 'debbugs' package that allows accessing the tracker database from Emacs. +A large backlog of bugs is disheartening to the developers, and a +culture of ignoring bugs is harmful to users, who expect software that +works. Bugs have to be regularly looked at and acted upon. Not all +bugs are critical, but at the least, each bug needs to be regularly +re-reviewed to make sure it is still reproducible. + +The process of going through open bugs and acting on them is called +bug triage. This process is described in the file admin/notes/triage. + ** Document your changes. Any change that matters to end-users should have an entry in etc/NEWS. diff --git a/admin/notes/triage b/admin/notes/triage new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a2518ca --- /dev/null +++ b/admin/notes/triage @@ -0,0 +1,44 @@ +HOW TO TRIAGE EMACS BUGS -*- outline -*- + +This document just describes the procedure of triaging bugs, for +information on how to work with the bug tracker, see the bugtracker +file in this same directory. + +* Bug backlog triage procedure + +The goal of this triage is to prune down the list of old bugs, closing +the ones that are not reproducible on the current release. + + 1. To start, enter debbugs mode (either debbugs-gnu, debbugs-org, or via the + web browser), and accept the default list option of bugs that have severity + serious, important, or normal. + 2. This will also show closed bugs that have yet to be archived. You can + filter these out in debbugs-gnu with "x" (debbugs-gnu-toggle-suppress). + 3. For each bug, do the following: + - Read the mail thread for the bug. Find out if anyone has been able to + reproduce this on the current release. + - If someone has been able to, then your work is finished for this bug. + - Make sure there's enough information to reproduce the bug. It should be + very clear how to reproduce. If not, please ask for specific steps to + reproduce. If you don't get them, and you can't reproduce without them, + you can close as "doneunreproducible". + - If no one has mentioned being able to reproduce on the current release, + read the bug description and attempt to reproduce on an emacs started + with "emacs -Q" (the goal is to not let our personal configs interfere + with bug testing). + - If you can reproduce, then reply on the thread (either on the original + message, or anywhere you find appropriate) that you can reproduce this on + the current release. If your reproduction gives additional info (such as + a backtrace), then add that as well, since it will help whoever attempts + to fix it. + - If you can't reproduce, state that you can't reproduce it on the current + release, ask if they can try again against the current release. Tag the + bug as "unreproducable". Wait a few weeks for their reply - if they can + reproduce it, then that's great, otherwise close as "doneunreproducible". + 4. Your changes will take some time to take effect. After a period of minutes + to hours, you will get a mail telling you the control message has been + processed. At this point, if there were no errors detected, you and + everyone else can see your changes. + + + -- 2.4.9 (Apple Git-60) ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-30 0:22 ` Andrew Hyatt @ 2015-12-30 17:21 ` Eli Zaretskii 2015-12-31 1:19 ` Noam Postavsky 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2015-12-30 17:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Hyatt; +Cc: emacs-devel > From: Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 19:22:27 -0500 > > >> +The goal of this triage is to prune down the list of old bugs, closing > >> +the ones that are not reproducible on the current release. > > > > I think triage is more than that: it should also strive to classify > > the bugs according to their importance. > > Yes, but isn't that more about triaging new bugs? I'm not writing about > that yet - but if someone tells me how to triage new bugs I'm happy to > write it up. You assume that old bugs already underwent this procedure, and if they did, their category is still correct. But neither of these assumption is necessarily true. Some bugs were triaged, others (I suspect most of them) were not. Moreover, their current category might very well be inaccurate, certainly if many years went by. So I think some effort should go into verifying that a bug does have a category that we still think to be correct. > >> + 4. Your changes will take some time to take effect. After a period of minutes > >> + to hours, you will get a mail telling you the control message has been > >> + processed. At this point, you and everyone else can see your changes. > > > > That mail can also say there were errors, something to mention here, I > > think. > > Mentioned, but I'm a bit at a loss on what to say if there were errors. One needs to read the error message and resubmit the control message modified as appropriate. E.g., one example I tend to bump into is when I merge a bug with another one, and debbugs refuses because their state is different -- in that case one needs to change the state of one of the two bugs and then resubmit the merge directive. Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-30 17:21 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2015-12-31 1:19 ` Noam Postavsky 2015-12-31 3:38 ` Eli Zaretskii 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Noam Postavsky @ 2015-12-31 1:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: Andrew Hyatt, emacs-devel On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote: > > One needs to read the error message and resubmit the control message > modified as appropriate. E.g., one example I tend to bump into is > when I merge a bug with another one, and debbugs refuses because their > state is different -- in that case one needs to change the state of > one of the two bugs and then resubmit the merge directive. Is there some reason not to use forcemerge? http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/tree/admin/notes/bugtracker?id=emacs-24.5#n345 *** Forcing a merge: Like 'merge', but bugs need not be in the same state. The packages must still match though (see 'reassign' below). The first one listed is the master. E.g.: forcemerge 123 124 125 ... Note: you cannot merge with an archived bug - you must unarchive it first. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-31 1:19 ` Noam Postavsky @ 2015-12-31 3:38 ` Eli Zaretskii 2015-12-31 9:06 ` Michael Albinus 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2015-12-31 3:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Noam Postavsky; +Cc: ahyatt, emacs-devel > Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 20:19:27 -0500 > From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@users.sourceforge.net> > Cc: Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com>, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote: > > > > One needs to read the error message and resubmit the control message > > modified as appropriate. E.g., one example I tend to bump into is > > when I merge a bug with another one, and debbugs refuses because their > > state is different -- in that case one needs to change the state of > > one of the two bugs and then resubmit the merge directive. > > Is there some reason not to use forcemerge? It still requires a new control message, so what I said is still valid. And as long as you do have to send a new control message, why not do it right? Also, note this caveat: > Note: you cannot merge with an archived bug - you must unarchive it first. IOW, even forcemerge won't always work. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-31 3:38 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2015-12-31 9:06 ` Michael Albinus 2015-12-31 13:49 ` Eli Zaretskii 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Michael Albinus @ 2015-12-31 9:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: ahyatt, emacs-devel, Noam Postavsky Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes: >> On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote: >> > >> > One needs to read the error message and resubmit the control message >> > modified as appropriate. E.g., one example I tend to bump into is >> > when I merge a bug with another one, and debbugs refuses because their >> > state is different -- in that case one needs to change the state of >> > one of the two bugs and then resubmit the merge directive. >> >> Is there some reason not to use forcemerge? > > It still requires a new control message, so what I said is still > valid. And as long as you do have to send a new control message, why > not do it right? > > Also, note this caveat: > >> Note: you cannot merge with an archived bug - you must unarchive it first. > > IOW, even forcemerge won't always work. debbugs-gnu could automate this scenario, in case it is desired. Just request it :-) Best regards, Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-31 9:06 ` Michael Albinus @ 2015-12-31 13:49 ` Eli Zaretskii 2015-12-31 13:57 ` Michael Albinus 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2015-12-31 13:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michael Albinus; +Cc: ahyatt, emacs-devel, npostavs > From: Michael Albinus <michael.albinus@gmx.de> > Cc: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@users.sourceforge.net>, ahyatt@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2015 10:06:05 +0100 > > >> Note: you cannot merge with an archived bug - you must unarchive it first. > > > > IOW, even forcemerge won't always work. > > debbugs-gnu could automate this scenario, in case it is desired. Just > request it :-) Automation is always welcome, although I'm unsure how can you know in advance what's TRT in each specific case. Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-31 13:49 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2015-12-31 13:57 ` Michael Albinus 0 siblings, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Michael Albinus @ 2015-12-31 13:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: ahyatt, emacs-devel, npostavs Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes: >> >> Note: you cannot merge with an archived bug - you must unarchive >> > it first. >> > >> > IOW, even forcemerge won't always work. >> >> debbugs-gnu could automate this scenario, in case it is desired. Just >> request it :-) > > Automation is always welcome, although I'm unsure how can you know in > advance what's TRT in each specific case. debbugs-gnu supports already the forcemerge control. It could check whether one of the involved bugs is archived, and unarchive it first. Or unarchive all involved bugs without a check, before requesting forcemerge. This would be a null operation for not archived bugs, but this doesn't harm I believe. To be tested. > Thanks. Best regards, Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-29 5:40 ` Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-29 17:12 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2016-01-07 21:04 ` Phillip Lord 2016-01-07 22:05 ` Andy Moreton 1 sibling, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Phillip Lord @ 2016-01-07 21:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Hyatt; +Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: > John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com> writes: > >>>>>>> Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: >> >> Perhaps we do need a targeted document for on-boarding bug herders. If, while >> you're learning this process, you could keep some notes on what helped you to >> get started, Andrew, that could become the start of such a document. > > I've put together my notes into a file I stuck in the admin section. > I'm attaching it as a patch. Feedback would be welcome, of course. I'm > guessing there's a few other things we'd like to put into this document > as well, but I won't attempt to go beyond just the basic triage > procedure we've discussed in this thread. Would you object to changing the name of this file to "bug-triage". It should say "bug" somewhere! Phil ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2016-01-07 21:04 ` Phillip Lord @ 2016-01-07 22:05 ` Andy Moreton 2016-01-07 22:40 ` Phillip Lord 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Andy Moreton @ 2016-01-07 22:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-devel On Thu 07 Jan 2016, Phillip Lord wrote: > Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: > >> John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com> writes: >> >>>>>>>> Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: >>> >>> Perhaps we do need a targeted document for on-boarding bug herders. If, while >>> you're learning this process, you could keep some notes on what helped you to >>> get started, Andrew, that could become the start of such a document. >> >> I've put together my notes into a file I stuck in the admin section. >> I'm attaching it as a patch. Feedback would be welcome, of course. I'm >> guessing there's a few other things we'd like to put into this document >> as well, but I won't attempt to go beyond just the basic triage >> procedure we've discussed in this thread. > > Would you object to changing the name of this file to "bug-triage". It > should say "bug" somewhere! Why ? Not all problems raised in an issue tracker are actually bugs (user error, misconfiguration, distro packaging issues etc). AndyM ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2016-01-07 22:05 ` Andy Moreton @ 2016-01-07 22:40 ` Phillip Lord 2016-01-09 3:46 ` Andrew Hyatt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Phillip Lord @ 2016-01-07 22:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andy Moreton; +Cc: emacs-devel Andy Moreton <andrewjmoreton@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu 07 Jan 2016, Phillip Lord wrote: > >> Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com> writes: >>> >>>>>>>>> Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: >>>> >>>> Perhaps we do need a targeted document for on-boarding bug herders. If, while >>>> you're learning this process, you could keep some notes on what helped you to >>>> get started, Andrew, that could become the start of such a document. >>> >>> I've put together my notes into a file I stuck in the admin section. >>> I'm attaching it as a patch. Feedback would be welcome, of course. I'm >>> guessing there's a few other things we'd like to put into this document >>> as well, but I won't attempt to go beyond just the basic triage >>> procedure we've discussed in this thread. >> >> Would you object to changing the name of this file to "bug-triage". It >> should say "bug" somewhere! > > Why ? Not all problems raised in an issue tracker are actually bugs > (user error, misconfiguration, distro packaging issues etc). "issue-triage" would also be fine. But "bug" is generally accepted here. "debbugs", "bugtracker" and so on. Just trying to increase discoverability. Phil ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2016-01-07 22:40 ` Phillip Lord @ 2016-01-09 3:46 ` Andrew Hyatt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Andrew Hyatt @ 2016-01-09 3:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Phillip Lord; +Cc: Andy Moreton, emacs-devel phillip.lord@russet.org.uk (Phillip Lord) writes: > Andy Moreton <andrewjmoreton@gmail.com> writes: > >> On Thu 07 Jan 2016, Phillip Lord wrote: >> >>> Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: >>> >>>> John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com> writes: >>>> >>>>>>>>>> Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps we do need a targeted document for on-boarding bug herders. If, while >>>>> you're learning this process, you could keep some notes on what helped you to >>>>> get started, Andrew, that could become the start of such a document. >>>> >>>> I've put together my notes into a file I stuck in the admin section. >>>> I'm attaching it as a patch. Feedback would be welcome, of course. I'm >>>> guessing there's a few other things we'd like to put into this document >>>> as well, but I won't attempt to go beyond just the basic triage >>>> procedure we've discussed in this thread. >>> >>> Would you object to changing the name of this file to "bug-triage". It >>> should say "bug" somewhere! >> >> Why ? Not all problems raised in an issue tracker are actually bugs >> (user error, misconfiguration, distro packaging issues etc). > > > "issue-triage" would also be fine. But "bug" is generally accepted here. > "debbugs", "bugtracker" and so on. > > Just trying to increase discoverability. I agree, I'll change this to bug-triage. FWIW, these systems always seem to be referred to as bug systems, even though they always end up handling other things besides bugs. > > Phil ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-28 5:39 Basic questions about the triage process Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-28 8:58 ` Michael Albinus 2015-12-28 20:24 ` John Wiegley @ 2015-12-28 23:55 ` Xue Fuqiao 2015-12-29 0:38 ` Andrew Hyatt 2 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Xue Fuqiao @ 2015-12-28 23:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Hyatt; +Cc: jwiegley, emacs-devel@gnu.org On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Andrew, > Sorry, maybe there was a document that explains this all, and I missed it. > If there's isn't such a document, I think it'd be pretty helpful. You can have a look at this post: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-10/msg00441.html Although the two documents mentioned in this post don't have answers to all of your questions, some information in them might be helpful. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-28 23:55 ` Xue Fuqiao @ 2015-12-29 0:38 ` Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-29 0:50 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Andrew Hyatt @ 2015-12-29 0:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Xue Fuqiao; +Cc: jwiegley, emacs-devel@gnu.org [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 834 bytes --] Great, thanks for the replies. I've started, and I'm going to start to mark the ones I can't reproduce as "doneunreproducable". "fixed" would presumably also be fine, since at some point someone must have fixed the bug. If anyone has a preference, let me know. On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 6:55 PM Xue Fuqiao <xfq.free@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Andrew, > > > Sorry, maybe there was a document that explains this all, and I missed > it. > > If there's isn't such a document, I think it'd be pretty helpful. > > You can have a look at this post: > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-10/msg00441.html > > Although the two documents mentioned in this post don't have answers to > all of your questions, some information in them might be helpful. > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1343 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-29 0:38 ` Andrew Hyatt @ 2015-12-29 0:50 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2015-12-29 0:59 ` Andrew Hyatt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2015-12-29 0:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Hyatt; +Cc: Xue Fuqiao, jwiegley, emacs-devel@gnu.org Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: > Great, thanks for the replies. I've started, and I'm going to start to > mark the ones I can't reproduce as "doneunreproducable". Well, even though you can't reproduce the bug doesn't mean that it necessarily isn't a valid bug -- there may be steps necessary that the bug reporter hasn't mentioned fully. I usually mark bugs as "unreproducible" and then send an email to the reporter asking whether it's gone away. If the reporter doesn't respond within a reasonable amount of time, then it's fine to close the bug. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-29 0:50 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2015-12-29 0:59 ` Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-29 1:07 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2015-12-29 17:03 ` Nikolaus Rath 0 siblings, 2 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Andrew Hyatt @ 2015-12-29 0:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lars Ingebrigtsen; +Cc: Xue Fuqiao, jwiegley, emacs-devel@gnu.org Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes: > Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: > >> Great, thanks for the replies. I've started, and I'm going to start to >> mark the ones I can't reproduce as "doneunreproducable". > > Well, even though you can't reproduce the bug doesn't mean that it > necessarily isn't a valid bug -- there may be steps necessary that the > bug reporter hasn't mentioned fully. > > I usually mark bugs as "unreproducible" and then send an email to the > reporter asking whether it's gone away. If the reporter doesn't respond > within a reasonable amount of time, then it's fine to close the bug. That sounds like a good idea for bugs of reasonable recentness. I'm going through old bugs that are years old now. To me, it feels a bit awkward to suddenly ask people to confirm anything after years have passed - just closing seems like a more reasonable approach to me. But I'll follow your advice for bugs in the last year. If you feel strongly that time elapsed shouldn't matter, though, I'm happy to do it your way all the time. Also, I'm assuming that the bug can always be re-opened if necessary. Maybe that isn't the case. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-29 0:59 ` Andrew Hyatt @ 2015-12-29 1:07 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2015-12-29 1:21 ` John Wiegley 2015-12-29 17:03 ` Nikolaus Rath 1 sibling, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2015-12-29 1:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Hyatt; +Cc: Xue Fuqiao, jwiegley, emacs-devel@gnu.org Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: > That sounds like a good idea for bugs of reasonable recentness. I'm > going through old bugs that are years old now. To me, it feels a bit > awkward to suddenly ask people to confirm anything after years have > passed - just closing seems like a more reasonable approach to me. But > I'll follow your advice for bugs in the last year. If you feel strongly > that time elapsed shouldn't matter, though, I'm happy to do it your way > all the time. Yeah, if they're really old and aren't reproducing, closing them may be the right thing to do. > Also, I'm assuming that the bug can always be re-opened if necessary. > Maybe that isn't the case. That's the case. But sending a form letter to the person who opened the bug report may be polite. Just something like "This bug doesn't reproduce in Emacs 25, so I'm closing the bug report. Please reopen if you're still seeing the bug." or something. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-29 1:07 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2015-12-29 1:21 ` John Wiegley 2015-12-29 1:50 ` Drew Adams 2015-12-29 6:46 ` CHENG Gao 0 siblings, 2 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: John Wiegley @ 2015-12-29 1:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lars Ingebrigtsen; +Cc: Xue Fuqiao, Andrew Hyatt, emacs-devel@gnu.org [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1169 bytes --] >>>>> Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes: > Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: >> That sounds like a good idea for bugs of reasonable recentness. I'm going >> through old bugs that are years old now. To me, it feels a bit awkward to >> suddenly ask people to confirm anything after years have passed - just >> closing seems like a more reasonable approach to me. But I'll follow your >> advice for bugs in the last year. If you feel strongly that time elapsed >> shouldn't matter, though, I'm happy to do it your way all the time. > Yeah, if they're really old and aren't reproducing, closing them may be the > right thing to do. Andrew, I think your strategy is good, but can we turn that clock back to two years? Emacs doesn't move all that rapidly. If you can't reproduce something From 2013 or earlier, close it as cannot reproduce with a CC to the original reporter. Otherwise, ping the submitter with a CC to the bug address saying it can't be reproduced, but leave it open. -- John Wiegley GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F http://newartisans.com 60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2 [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 629 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* RE: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-29 1:21 ` John Wiegley @ 2015-12-29 1:50 ` Drew Adams 2016-01-02 21:37 ` Marcin Borkowski 2015-12-29 6:46 ` CHENG Gao 1 sibling, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Drew Adams @ 2015-12-29 1:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: John Wiegley, Lars Ingebrigtsen; +Cc: Xue Fuqiao, Andrew Hyatt, emacs-devel > > Yeah, if they're really old and aren't reproducing, closing them may be > > the right thing to do. > > Andrew, I think your strategy is good, but can we turn that clock back to > two years? Emacs doesn't move all that rapidly. If you can't reproduce something > From 2013 or earlier, close it as cannot reproduce with a CC to the original > reporter. Otherwise, ping the submitter with a CC to the bug address saying > it can't be reproduced, but leave it open. FWIW, I disagree that there should be a 2-year limit, or any limit. If Emacs Dev has never responded to a bug report, no matter how old, then it should be treated as new. If you cannot seem to reproduce it now then start by asking for more info - and not after closing it, just as you would do for a bug reported yesterday. If Emac Dev has responded previously, that's a different story. But there is a giant backlog of bugs, and some of them are several years old (perhaps even many years old) and have never been responded to. What should count, if you must count time elapsed, is the time since the last attempt by a bug fixer to obtain info. If no one has ever tried, then the clock should be reset to zero. (Just one opinion.) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-29 1:50 ` Drew Adams @ 2016-01-02 21:37 ` Marcin Borkowski 2016-02-15 20:04 ` Marcin Borkowski 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Marcin Borkowski @ 2016-01-02 21:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Drew Adams Cc: Xue Fuqiao, John Wiegley, Lars Ingebrigtsen, Andrew Hyatt, emacs-devel Hi, I'm starting to work on bugs, too. On 2015-12-29, at 02:50, Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> wrote: >> > Yeah, if they're really old and aren't reproducing, closing them may be >> > the right thing to do. >> >> Andrew, I think your strategy is good, but can we turn that clock back to >> two years? Emacs doesn't move all that rapidly. If you can't reproduce something >> From 2013 or earlier, close it as cannot reproduce with a CC to the original >> reporter. Otherwise, ping the submitter with a CC to the bug address saying >> it can't be reproduced, but leave it open. > > FWIW, I disagree that there should be a 2-year limit, or any limit. > > If Emacs Dev has never responded to a bug report, no matter > how old, then it should be treated as new. If you cannot > seem to reproduce it now then start by asking for more info - > and not after closing it, just as you would do for a bug > reported yesterday. > > If Emac Dev has responded previously, that's a different > story. But there is a giant backlog of bugs, and some of > them are several years old (perhaps even many years old) > and have never been responded to. > > What should count, if you must count time elapsed, is the > time since the last attempt by a bug fixer to obtain info. > If no one has ever tried, then the clock should be reset > to zero. > > (Just one opinion.) And another one, too - I agree with Drew on this Best, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science Adam Mickiewicz University ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2016-01-02 21:37 ` Marcin Borkowski @ 2016-02-15 20:04 ` Marcin Borkowski 0 siblings, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Marcin Borkowski @ 2016-02-15 20:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Drew Adams Cc: Xue Fuqiao, John Wiegley, Lars Ingebrigtsen, Andrew Hyatt, emacs-devel On 2016-01-02, at 22:37, Marcin Borkowski <mbork@mbork.pl> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm starting to work on bugs, too. Hi, I've been doing a bit of work on bugs recently, and I got to bugs from 2014. Should I continue with more recent bugs? What would be a valuable (from the point of view of Emacs devs) use of my limited time for that? Best, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science Adam Mickiewicz University ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-29 1:21 ` John Wiegley 2015-12-29 1:50 ` Drew Adams @ 2015-12-29 6:46 ` CHENG Gao 2015-12-29 15:50 ` Eli Zaretskii 1 sibling, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: CHENG Gao @ 2015-12-29 6:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-devel *On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 17:21:22 -0800 * Also sprach John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com>: >>>>>> Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes: > >> Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: >>> That sounds like a good idea for bugs of reasonable recentness. I'm >>> going through old bugs that are years old now. To me, it feels a >>> bit awkward to suddenly ask people to confirm anything after years >>> have passed - just closing seems like a more reasonable approach to >>> me. But I'll follow your advice for bugs in the last year. If you >>> feel strongly that time elapsed shouldn't matter, though, I'm happy >>> to do it your way all the time. > >> Yeah, if they're really old and aren't reproducing, closing them may >> be the right thing to do. > > Andrew, I think your strategy is good, but can we turn that clock back > to two years? Emacs doesn't move all that rapidly. If you can't > reproduce something From 2013 or earlier, close it as cannot reproduce > with a CC to the original reporter. Otherwise, ping the submitter with > a CC to the bug address saying it can't be reproduced, but leave it > open. Maybe the strategy needs a clarification of version supporting policy or should be based on said policy if it exists. Say for example 24.x line supported while 23.x support dropped. The priority could be as below: Number one: emacs-25 branch related Should have highest priority since they'll block the release. Number two: emacs git They slow down moving train. Number three: emacs 24.x Maybe a policy to include accumulated fixes in a new release untill support dropped, for example yearly bugfix on Dec. 25 or Dec. 31. Bug fixes only, no new feature backports. Number four: emacs 23.x/22.x etc (justing kidding. No kidding?) If bothered by "cannot sleep thinking users are abandoned in darkness" syndrome, accept users submitted patches and release accumulated bugfix minor version each year as above. Maybe a cycling poicy can be built. Just my RMB2 cents. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-29 6:46 ` CHENG Gao @ 2015-12-29 15:50 ` Eli Zaretskii 0 siblings, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2015-12-29 15:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: CHENG Gao; +Cc: emacs-devel > From: CHENG Gao <chenggao@royau.me> > Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 14:46:48 +0800 > > > Andrew, I think your strategy is good, but can we turn that clock back > > to two years? Emacs doesn't move all that rapidly. If you can't > > reproduce something From 2013 or earlier, close it as cannot reproduce > > with a CC to the original reporter. Otherwise, ping the submitter with > > a CC to the bug address saying it can't be reproduced, but leave it > > open. > > Maybe the strategy needs a clarification of version supporting policy or > should be based on said policy if it exists. We always support only the latest released version, but if a bug reported in an old version still exists in the latest one, we try fixing it in the next release. IOW, I don't see any relation between version support policy and the strategy of triage of bug reports. > The priority could be as below: > > Number one: emacs-25 branch related > Should have highest priority since they'll block the release. > > Number two: emacs git > They slow down moving train. > > Number three: emacs 24.x > Maybe a policy to include accumulated fixes in a new release untill > support dropped, for example yearly bugfix on Dec. 25 or Dec. 31. > Bug fixes only, no new feature backports. > > Number four: emacs 23.x/22.x etc (justing kidding. No kidding?) > If bothered by "cannot sleep thinking users are abandoned in darkness" > syndrome, accept users submitted patches and release accumulated bugfix > minor version each year as above. I don't think triage should depend on bug priority. On the contrary, priority can only be established once the triage has been done; thus, triage should always have the highest priority, IMO. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-29 0:59 ` Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-29 1:07 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2015-12-29 17:03 ` Nikolaus Rath 2015-12-29 17:16 ` John Wiegley 2015-12-29 17:50 ` Drew Adams 1 sibling, 2 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Nikolaus Rath @ 2015-12-29 17:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-devel On Dec 28 2015, Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> wrote: > To me, it feels a bit > awkward to suddenly ask people to confirm anything after years have > passed - just closing seems like a more reasonable approach to me. As a reporter, I can assure you that I feel exactly the other way around. It takes time to write good bugreports, and if they languish for several years only to eventually get closed because they "seem to have been fixed" makes me angry. I consider a polite "I tried to reproduce it but failed, could you confirm that this is fixed for you as well?" to be much more respectful of my time and contribution. Best, -Nikolaus -- GPG encrypted emails preferred. Key id: 0xD113FCAC3C4E599F Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F »Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.« ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-29 17:03 ` Nikolaus Rath @ 2015-12-29 17:16 ` John Wiegley 2015-12-29 17:50 ` Drew Adams 1 sibling, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: John Wiegley @ 2015-12-29 17:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-devel [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 744 bytes --] >>>>> Nikolaus Rath <Nikolaus@rath.org> writes: > On Dec 28 2015, Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> wrote: >> To me, it feels a bit awkward to suddenly ask people to confirm anything >> after years have passed - just closing seems like a more reasonable >> approach to me. > As a reporter, I can assure you that I feel exactly the other way around. On other projects, I've sent such "query mails" many years after the original report, and no one was ever bothered by it. And I've received them myself, often only to say "I don't use system X anymore", but it didn't upset me. -- John Wiegley GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F http://newartisans.com 60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2 [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 629 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* RE: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-29 17:03 ` Nikolaus Rath 2015-12-29 17:16 ` John Wiegley @ 2015-12-29 17:50 ` Drew Adams 2015-12-29 23:36 ` Andrew Hyatt 1 sibling, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Drew Adams @ 2015-12-29 17:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nikolaus Rath, emacs-devel > > To me, it feels a bit > > awkward to suddenly ask people to confirm anything after years have > > passed - just closing seems like a more reasonable approach to me. > > As a reporter, I can assure you that I feel exactly the other way > around. It takes time to write good bugreports, and if they languish for > several years only to eventually get closed because they "seem to have > been fixed" makes me angry. > > I consider a polite "I tried to reproduce it > but failed, could you confirm that this is fixed for you as well?" to be > much more respectful of my time and contribution. 100% agreement. Users who write bug reports are helping. Even more important: they are actively _trying_ to help. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-29 17:50 ` Drew Adams @ 2015-12-29 23:36 ` Andrew Hyatt 2016-01-07 21:09 ` Phillip Lord 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Andrew Hyatt @ 2015-12-29 23:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Drew Adams; +Cc: Nikolaus Rath, emacs-devel Sounds like there's some widespread feeling that we should ask first regardless of how much time has passed. The difference seems a bit minor to me (the real issue is the languishing of bugs, I think), because the only difference is whether we close before the email or after waiting for a response. But I'll just ask first, give people a few weeks to respond, and then close the bug if there's no response. FWIW, on the bugs I looked at yesterday, a few bounced from the reporter's email, so I'll just close them immediately if that happens. Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes: >> > To me, it feels a bit >> > awkward to suddenly ask people to confirm anything after years have >> > passed - just closing seems like a more reasonable approach to me. >> >> As a reporter, I can assure you that I feel exactly the other way >> around. It takes time to write good bugreports, and if they languish for >> several years only to eventually get closed because they "seem to have >> been fixed" makes me angry. >> >> I consider a polite "I tried to reproduce it >> but failed, could you confirm that this is fixed for you as well?" to be >> much more respectful of my time and contribution. > > 100% agreement. Users who write bug reports are helping. > Even more important: they are actively _trying_ to help. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2015-12-29 23:36 ` Andrew Hyatt @ 2016-01-07 21:09 ` Phillip Lord 2016-01-07 21:28 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Phillip Lord @ 2016-01-07 21:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Hyatt; +Cc: Nikolaus Rath, Drew Adams, emacs-devel Is there a "pending-closure" tag, that can be used to help the clean up? Then one person could send the "I think this is outdated now" email, and another close it later. Phil Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: > Sounds like there's some widespread feeling that we should ask first > regardless of how much time has passed. The difference seems a bit minor > to me (the real issue is the languishing of bugs, I think), because the > only difference is whether we close before the email or after waiting > for a response. But I'll just ask first, give people a few weeks to > respond, and then close the bug if there's no response. > > FWIW, on the bugs I looked at yesterday, a few bounced from the > reporter's email, so I'll just close them immediately if that happens. > > Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes: > >>> > To me, it feels a bit >>> > awkward to suddenly ask people to confirm anything after years have >>> > passed - just closing seems like a more reasonable approach to me. >>> >>> As a reporter, I can assure you that I feel exactly the other way >>> around. It takes time to write good bugreports, and if they languish for >>> several years only to eventually get closed because they "seem to have >>> been fixed" makes me angry. >>> >>> I consider a polite "I tried to reproduce it >>> but failed, could you confirm that this is fixed for you as well?" to be >>> much more respectful of my time and contribution. >> >> 100% agreement. Users who write bug reports are helping. >> Even more important: they are actively _trying_ to help. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2016-01-07 21:09 ` Phillip Lord @ 2016-01-07 21:28 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen 2016-01-09 3:47 ` Andrew Hyatt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen @ 2016-01-07 21:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Phillip Lord; +Cc: Andrew Hyatt, Nikolaus Rath, Drew Adams, emacs-devel phillip.lord@russet.org.uk (Phillip Lord) writes: > Is there a "pending-closure" tag, that can be used to help the clean up? > Then one person could send the "I think this is outdated now" email, and > another close it later. That's basically "moreinfo". -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2016-01-07 21:28 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen @ 2016-01-09 3:47 ` Andrew Hyatt 2016-01-09 20:56 ` John Wiegley 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Andrew Hyatt @ 2016-01-09 3:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Cc: Nikolaus Rath, emacs-devel, Drew Adams, Phillip Lord Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes: > phillip.lord@russet.org.uk (Phillip Lord) writes: > >> Is there a "pending-closure" tag, that can be used to help the clean up? >> Then one person could send the "I think this is outdated now" email, and >> another close it later. > > That's basically "moreinfo". I've been using the "unreproducible" tag as just this sort of tag - it means that it can't be reproduced at least by me, and if no one can reproduce it within a few weeks, it should be turned into "doneunreproducible". I've detailed this process in the admin/notes/triage file (which I'll soon rename to admin/notes/bug-triage). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: Basic questions about the triage process 2016-01-09 3:47 ` Andrew Hyatt @ 2016-01-09 20:56 ` John Wiegley 0 siblings, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: John Wiegley @ 2016-01-09 20:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Hyatt Cc: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen, Phillip Lord, Nikolaus Rath, Drew Adams, emacs-devel [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 696 bytes --] >>>>> Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com> writes: >> That's basically "moreinfo". > I've been using the "unreproducible" tag as just this sort of tag - it means > that it can't be reproduced at least by me, and if no one can reproduce it > within a few weeks, it should be turned into "doneunreproducible". I've > detailed this process in the admin/notes/triage file (which I'll soon rename > to admin/notes/bug-triage). Indeed, I had thought "moreinfo" meant: I need more information before I can even attempt to reproduce this. -- John Wiegley GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F http://newartisans.com 60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2 [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 629 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-02-15 20:04 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 37+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2015-12-28 5:39 Basic questions about the triage process Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-28 8:58 ` Michael Albinus 2015-12-28 16:25 ` Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-28 17:35 ` Michael Albinus 2015-12-28 20:24 ` John Wiegley 2015-12-29 5:40 ` Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-29 17:12 ` Eli Zaretskii 2015-12-30 0:22 ` Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-30 17:21 ` Eli Zaretskii 2015-12-31 1:19 ` Noam Postavsky 2015-12-31 3:38 ` Eli Zaretskii 2015-12-31 9:06 ` Michael Albinus 2015-12-31 13:49 ` Eli Zaretskii 2015-12-31 13:57 ` Michael Albinus 2016-01-07 21:04 ` Phillip Lord 2016-01-07 22:05 ` Andy Moreton 2016-01-07 22:40 ` Phillip Lord 2016-01-09 3:46 ` Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-28 23:55 ` Xue Fuqiao 2015-12-29 0:38 ` Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-29 0:50 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2015-12-29 0:59 ` Andrew Hyatt 2015-12-29 1:07 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2015-12-29 1:21 ` John Wiegley 2015-12-29 1:50 ` Drew Adams 2016-01-02 21:37 ` Marcin Borkowski 2016-02-15 20:04 ` Marcin Borkowski 2015-12-29 6:46 ` CHENG Gao 2015-12-29 15:50 ` Eli Zaretskii 2015-12-29 17:03 ` Nikolaus Rath 2015-12-29 17:16 ` John Wiegley 2015-12-29 17:50 ` Drew Adams 2015-12-29 23:36 ` Andrew Hyatt 2016-01-07 21:09 ` Phillip Lord 2016-01-07 21:28 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen 2016-01-09 3:47 ` Andrew Hyatt 2016-01-09 20:56 ` John Wiegley
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).