| nigelb | bdmurray: There is a new tag to be added to the script suggested by seb 'patch-needsinput' when the patch is awaiting input from something else to be integrated in | 16:21 |
|---|---|---|
| BlackZ | nigelb: in the bug #544910 I have unsubscribed ~ubuntu-reviewers since ~ubuntu-sponsors is subscribed, you subscribed it | 17:15 |
| ubot4 | Launchpad bug 544910 in aiccu (Debian) (and 1 other project) "Upgrade to 10.04 beta1 blocked by aiccu (affects: 4) (heat: 28)" [Unknown,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/544910 | 17:15 |
| nigelb | BlackZ: its a script and yeah, something is wrong with it. I'm working on it | 17:16 |
| BlackZ | nigelb: just for info :) | 17:16 |
| nigelb | The script was *not* supposed to do that. I wonder why :x | 17:17 |
| BlackZ | heh | 17:17 |
| BlackZ | nigelb: can you show me the code? | 17:17 |
| nigelb | hold on | 17:18 |
| nigelb | http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~nigelbabu/ubuntu-review-overview/trunk/annotate/head:/clean-sweep.py | 17:18 |
| nigelb | if you find something wrong, poke me or branch and request merge. | 17:18 |
| BlackZ | sure, I will | 17:19 |
| BlackZ | nigelb: actually, what's wrong with it? | 17:19 |
| nigelb | well, it works perfectly | 17:19 |
| nigelb | only its failing for some bugs. I'm trying to find the error log. | 17:19 |
| nigelb | It takes a whole 12 hours to run, main problme | 17:20 |
| vish | nigelb: that tag was not why seb suggested it , and it does not solve what we wanted! | 17:21 |
| vish | bdmurray: too ^ | 17:21 |
| nigelb | vish: what the... I thought this was sorted out | 17:22 |
| vish | nigelb: hrm? when? | 17:23 |
| vish | nigelb: you have been coding till now ;p | 17:23 |
| BlackZ | nigelb: OK, I will take a look at it later :) | 17:23 |
| nigelb | vish: yeah, reportbug + python is crazy | 17:23 |
| nigelb | I was up till 4 last night | 17:23 |
| nigelb | or today morning rather | 17:23 |
| nigelb | vish: ok, so about the tag. seb proposed patch-needsinput where its awaiting input from someone else, in this case he particularly talked about design. I extended that to any issue where its blocked on something else. What exactly is the problem with that? | 17:28 |
| vish | nigelb: for design bugs needing input , patch is already present , how does a design advocate get to the bug? [there is a design advocates being formed to do such work] | 17:31 |
| vish | nigelb: the reviewer has to tag them | 17:31 |
| nigelb | vish: there is going to be a team of people who will be taking decisions? | 17:32 |
| vish | nigelb: yes | 17:33 |
| vish | nigelb: there is going to be design advocates , who will be looking into such bugs | 17:33 |
| nigelb | vish: easy then, subscribe then to the bug and then can look for the tag patch-needsinput | 17:34 |
| vish | nigelb: who is going to subscribe them? | 17:34 |
| vish | reviewer again ;) | 17:34 |
| nigelb | not really | 17:34 |
| nigelb | oh yeah, right | 17:34 |
| nigelb | thats's fine by me | 17:34 |
| nigelb | just let me know when there is such a team and we can add that to the workflow | 17:35 |
| vish | nigelb: there is no lp team being formed , [unofficial is the ayatan UX team for now] | 17:35 |
| nigelb | well, then we'll just subscribe that team | 17:36 |
| vish | nigelb: hence tag the design bugs now , and later we can get the team subscribed | 17:36 |
| nigelb | I can do a design tag separately for bugs that are design related but that can't be done by reviewers | 17:36 |
| nigelb | ayatana would have to do that | 17:36 |
| vish | nigelb: how will ayatan know of the bugs with patches? | 17:37 |
| vish | that are waiting design review | 17:37 |
| nigelb | who else will know? | 17:37 |
| vish | nigelb: the reviewer! | 17:37 |
| nigelb | that is my problem. how does a reviewer know something is awaiting design review | 17:37 |
| vish | nigelb: add a new button , add new icon , those are the kind of bugs | 17:38 |
| nigelb | See the whole thing is for ubuntu-speific packages which is not our main focus. In fact, I'm trying to get those packages out of patch review. | 17:38 |
| nigelb | Our whole effort is to give the patches in LP to the right upstream so they can make a call on it | 17:39 |
| vish | nigelb: well , you have subscribed the reviewers lot of those bugs | 17:39 |
| vish | nigelb: i told persia this and he insisted they need to be in the review team's perview | 17:39 |
| nigelb | I know. I have to write up the blacklist procedure, which I've not even started - real life is a bit hectic | 17:39 |
| nigelb | Just give me a few days - one at a time | 17:39 |
| nigelb | right now I'm focusing on something else. The patch subscription script that I'm running is failining on some bugs and I have to figure out why | 17:40 |
| * nigelb ==> dinner | 17:40 | |
| vish | nigelb: talk to persia before you waste time on a blacklist... he specifically didnt want packages blacklisted | 19:19 |
| nigelb | vish: actually we both came up with it | 19:20 |
| vish | nigelb: better to check again. i doubt he would have mentioned excluding packages ;) | 19:21 |
| vish | nigelb: anyway ubuntu specific packages are several , SC , synaptic , Update-manager and there are design patches there too.. | 19:22 |
| nigelb | vish: It ws discussed at uds too | 19:22 |
| nigelb | actually one of my WIs | 19:22 |
| vish | nigelb: thats a weird decision , so we are to exclude all ubuntu specific patches now? | 19:25 |
| vish | rather packages* | 19:25 |
| vish | what happens to those patches , and who checks those? | 19:26 |
| nigelb | nope | 19:29 |
| nigelb | we *dont* exclude anything arbitarily | 19:29 |
| nigelb | we give developers/maintainers an *option* to exclude their packages from review | 19:30 |
| vish | nigelb: hmm , right but if the maintainer has not excluded their packages and prefers the review team. again we are still left with the design bugs those will need tags :s | 19:31 |
| nigelb | yes, people who notice that something is design related has to tag it design | 19:32 |
| nigelb | we'll tag everything that needs input as patch-needsinput | 19:32 |
| vish | nigelb: again , you are not solving the problem the tag was requested for. that design tag will have to be tagged by the reviewer | 19:33 |
| vish | nigelb: who else would know about the tags? | 19:33 |
| nigelb | vish: I do *NOT* want a tag for design input, one for kernel input, one for server input | 19:34 |
| vish | nigelb: what you suggest is patch-needsinput + a design tag , which works for me | 19:35 |
| nigelb | yep | 19:35 |
| vish | nigelb: what i mention is that the "design" tagging should be part of the reviewers work flow | 19:35 |
| nigelb | Also, I can't have everyone know that something requires design input, so the ayatana team might want to take of it | 19:35 |
| nigelb | how is a reviewer expected to know that? | 19:36 |
| vish | nigelb: how will the ayatana team know of the bug's existance? | 19:36 |
| vish | nigelb: if a reviewer is tagging needsinput , without knowing it is a design input , what is he requesting input for? | 19:36 |
| nigelb | well, aren't you folks subscribed to everything design related? | 19:36 |
| nigelb | vish: you see it would be a reviewer tagging it that way | 19:37 |
| nigelb | thats where you're confused | 19:37 |
| nigelb | most of the time its dx that will do that needsinput tagging | 19:37 |
| vish | nigelb: nope , the dx need to be notified about the bug and patch | 19:38 |
| nigelb | vish: The thing is, the reviewer *won't* know why it is not in. Its not our call when something makes it in | 19:38 |
| nigelb | the review only says "this works" | 19:38 |
| vish | nigelb: right , then why would he tag it "needsinput"? | 19:39 |
| nigelb | to remove it from the review queue | 19:39 |
| nigelb | that is why seb proposed the tag, because even though the patch works, only thing its not it because of the needsinput | 19:40 |
| nigelb | only thing its not *in* is because its needs input | 19:40 |
| vish | nigelb: you are not getting the point , if he thinks it works , he should just request upload , why would he think about inout? | 19:40 |
| vish | input* | 19:40 |
| nigelb | er, you seem to be lost | 19:41 |
| nigelb | We have a bug A | 19:41 |
| nigelb | ther is a patch to add a button to do foo | 19:41 |
| nigelb | patch works, no regressions | 19:41 |
| nigelb | but it needs a design decision, so its marked as needsinput because it doesn't need review anymore | 19:42 |
| vish | nigelb: yes , so it is the reviewer thinking it needs design input, right? | 19:42 |
| nigelb | I was hoping the maintainer marked as such | 19:42 |
| nigelb | for example, if its software center, mvo has to mark it as needsinput | 19:43 |
| vish | just to be clear .. who is marking it as "needsinput" ? | 19:43 |
| nigelb | I'm not clear. I wwant to talk to seb on monday. | 19:46 |
| nigelb | Hence not added to wiki or script if you noticed. | 19:46 |
| vish | nigelb: right , the the reviewers dont even have to bother about the needsinput tag.. we leave it to the maintainer , but have it in the script | 19:47 |
| vish | then the* | 19:47 |
| nigelb | yup. Need to do that. | 19:47 |
| nigelb | Like I said, busy doing postmortem on the script for cleansweep project | 19:48 |
| vish | nigelb: yup , hence left it .. but since you mentioned it for inclusion to the script had to make it clear it is not solid yet | 19:49 |
| vish | ;) | 19:49 |
| vish | the ping to bd_murray ^ | 19:50 |
| nigelb | I'm trying to get it to a process where I dont' have to ping him. Like putting it to a branch and his branch getting updated every 24 hours | 19:51 |
| nigelb | his local copy rather | 19:51 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!