[Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 3.13: (STM release) Details
Niels de Vos
ndevos at redhat.com
Wed Nov 1 11:18:02 UTC 2017
On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 06:56:02AM -0400, Shyam Ranganathan wrote:
> On 10/31/2017 02:52 PM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
> > @maintainers on the patch review, please ensure that we have a
> > github
> > reference for features, else there is a lot we will miss for the
> > same!
> > This was a miss from my end where I should have checked the
> > corresponding issue id in the patch. Apologies!
> > Can we have a job to check if a bugzilla is used upstream against a
> > patch which has a FutureFeature as a keyword, we fail such jobs to
> > automate such misses not to happen? And then RFEs can be closed using
> > github references?
> Is the keyword followed diligently, that we can rely on such a check?
> Who adds the keyword to BZ in case others missed adding the same?
> I ask, as I was unaware of this keyword myself.
We actually have the FutureFeature keyword documented in the bug
> FutureFeature : This keyword is used for bugs which are used to
> request for a feature enhancement ( RFE - Requested Feature
> Enhancement) for future releases of GlusterFS. If you open a bug by
> requesting a feature which you would like to see in next versions of
> GlusterFS please report with this keyword.
Ideally, anyone working on bugs is aware of these and follows the
guidelines. Unfortunately we can not assume that is the case. Triaging
does not seem to happen as regurarely as when we had the weekly meetings
dedicated to this. The "Weekly Untriaged Bugs" email does require an
action from the developers working on the components, hopefully that
will be seen of higher importance with this email thread.
Latest example of the untriaged bugs email:
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Gluster-devel