On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Michal Skrivanek <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:it is a tradeoff. It was mentioned before that the other way around we would be left with too many POSTed bugs which are actually already merged. The maintainer is typically not the assignee so if you e.g. merge the last patch on Thursday afternoon it takes some time to gets attention, in the meantime there is a build which won’t consider that bug.On 18 Aug 2016, at 09:09, Sandro Bonazzola <email@example.com> wrote:On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Nir Soffer <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Eyal Edri <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Nir Soffer <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Eyal Edri <email@example.com> wrote:
>> > I still thinks its a very valuable hook and we are aware of the fact it
>> > has
>> > bugs, especially with patches on master branch and 4.0.
>> > Shlomi from the infra team is working on a solution for it as we speak
>> > and
>> > we hope to have a solution in the next few days, however it's not
>> > trival to
>> > test and requires setting up a staging env and improve loga for the
>> > hooks
>> > system.
>> How do you plan to solve this?
>> Only the owner of the bug knows if the all the required patches are merged
> The authors should use Bug-Url on the main bug and related-to: on other
> patches that are related.
This is not possible. Many times you need series of patches to fix a bug, and
you the number of patches may change during development. You start with one
patch, and later you find that you need another one, so all of them will have
a bug url.
Practically, you should expect that all patches in the series will
have a bug-url.
If the hook will change the bug incorrectly someone will have to fix this, and
it is very unlikely that a developer will go to clean after the hook.
>> and backported to the correct repositories.
> This is done with logic according to the bug target milestone.
> for e.g - a patch on branch 'ovirt-engine-4.0' was merged to bug targeted to
> The hook should check if branch 4.0.2 exists or not, if it exists then the
> bug should NOT move to MODIFIED,
> since it needs still backporting to ovirt-engine-4.0.2 branch.
This is too fragile. For example, maybe a 4.0.2 branch is created after
the patch was merged to 4.0 branch, and the patch will be missing, although
the bug is already set to modified.
Setting to modified should be done by the owner of the bug, after verifying
that the patches exists in correct branch.
I'm not suggesting to remove the hook, just disable the feature of making
a bug modified.+1. On build day checking that bugs in modified not listed in Bug-Url on the build branch due to missing backport is a painful experience.The other way around is having a modified bugs which should have been in post being considered in the build, moved to QE, failing QE, move back to assigned.Not sure it's much better.it is when the amount of false positive ON_QA bugs is far less than amount of forgotten bugsI’m not advocating for it, I’m just saying it was pointed out that this was the situation before we introduced the hook.Perhaps with the doc police emails it is no longer a relevant point
Devel mailing list