Re: [gentoo-dev] Planning for automatic assignment of bugs

[Dan Meltzer]

On Thursday 26 April 2007 3:40:06 pm Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> So as a not-so-brief follow-up to solar's email, here is a brief
> proposal on the automatic assignment stuff, incl. one spot that we might
> need to add an attribute to metadata.xml.
>
> Assignment process, triggering:
> ===============================
> Auto-assignment will be be applied/available in the following cases:
> 1. New bugs created with the guided process, having a Product equal to
>    'Gentoo Linux' and a component not equal to 'Eclasses and Profiles'.
> 2. Open bugs will have a new action available: 'Reassign by metadata',
>    with a text input field. The text field will be auto-filled with a
>    package atom $CAT/$PN by parsing the summary line. Using the action
>    will provide the package atom to the next stage.
>
> If multiple package atoms are present in a summary line, the first one
> wins.
>
> Assignment process, after the package is known:
> ===============================================
>
> We have a package spec now, so we can find who to assign the bug to.
>
> Objectives in this section are to reduce unwanted duplicate mail, while
> still preserving the data in metadata for non-automated usage.
>
> Case 1 - Metadata contains only a herd
> --------------------------------------
> - The herd will have @gentoo.org appended, and this must be a valid
>   bugzilla account.
>
> Case 2 - Metadata contains a single maintainer
> ----------------------------------------------
> - The herd field is not used.
> - The maintainer address is used as the bugzilla assignee.
> This is important for all the herds that have aliases that are NOT the
> same as their herd name!
> This diverges from existing manual practice, to avoid unnecessary
> duplicate mail, and means that existing metadata may need a cleanup.
>
> Case 3 - Metadata contains multiple maintainers
> -----------------------------------------------
> - Follow case 2 first.
> - Further maintainer addresses are used in the CC field.
>
> Case 4 - Metadata contains multiple maintainers, some special
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> - Follow case 3 first.
> - If a maintainer is listed in the metadata for special reasons (eg only
>   for some special patch), they should include the 'contact=0' attribute
>   on their maintainer element AND have a role element present
>   describing why.
> - This also allows for cases where the herd address should be used as
>   the assignee, and the maintainer does NOT want a duplicate CC.
>
> Comments etc welcome.

Sounds good... one suggestion I have is to try and detect new ebuild 
submissions and resassign them to m-w automatically as well.  maybe a 
checkbox "this is a new ebuild" or some other way to automatically detect it?
-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list