ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive

[Sense Hofstede <sense@xxxxxxxx>]

2009/11/24 Brian Murray <brian@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> I apologize if I was not clear but I am talking about bug patterns[1],
> not apport hooks.  These patterns disable the filing of bugs by apport
> for specific bug reports.
>
> [1]
> https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-bugcontrol/apport/ubuntu-bugpatterns
>
> --
> Brian Murray                                                 @ubuntu.com
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAksMRxUACgkQDTAwc5ER+zUzywCgsHoLwF/cHhYfeoQpmb5pkHRI
> 8FwAoNzXFh55xjGgvtJ9CXSXHe5LafmX
> =/DR6
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>

Actually I made a mistake here. I should have known about the
patterns, I probably even attended the session where it was discussed
remotely. In that case subscribing Bug Control to the reports does
make sense.

2009/11/24 Brian Murray <brian@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 04:42:14PM -0600, Paul Larson wrote:
>> On Mon, 2009-11-23 at 14:32 -0800, Brian Murray wrote:
>> > At UDS Lucid one thing we were discussing was the small quantity of bug
>> > patterns being written and how it is hard to discover for which bugs to
>> > write a pattern.  It was suggested that the apport retracer subscribe
>> > us, the Ubuntu Bug Control team, to bug reports with more than 10
>> > duplicates as a way of notifying us that a bug could use a pattern.
>> > After the pattern was written the team would be unsubscribed from the
>> > bug report.  I like this idea a lot but would like to hear from other
>> > team members too.
>> I think it would be useful if after the subscription, it could add a tag
>> to make searching for these type of bugs convenient.  Something like
>> 'pattern-needed' perhaps.  Then we could probably do with a second tag
>> to say that either a pattern has been created, or it has been looked at
>> and determined that no pattern is needed.  That way if someone does
>> either of those things and unsubscribes the bug, it won't just get
>> resubscribed if there's another dup to it later.
>
> The tagging makes sense, so I see the workflow as:
>
> retracer will subscribe ubuntu-bugcontrol and tag 'bugpattern-needed'
>
> we will unsubscribe ubuntu-bugcontrol and tag 'bugpattern-written'
>
> or
>
> we will unsubscribe ubuntu-bugcontrol and tag 'bugpattern-deferred'
>
> --
> Brian Murray                                                 @ubuntu.com
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAksMSDkACgkQDTAwc5ER+zUtNACfQuhxUndsnwDICj/ozxBkp5op
> odgAn3LbM5Bau5SkXmscV/Dk3P+5gsT3
> =q4Mo
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
This work-flow would probably be the best approach for this, but we do
need good documentation for writing patterns. If that and the
work-flow are both made clear to the people involved I see no reason
not to implement it.

Regards,
-- 
Sense Hofstede
/ˈsen.sɜː ˈhɒf.steɪdɜː/