On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 12:28:10PM +0100, Julie Pichon wrote: > Hi, > > On Friday Dougal mentioned on IRC that he hadn't realised there was a > separate project for tripleo-common bugs on Launchpad [1] and that he'd > been using the TripleO main tracker [2] instead. > > Since the TripleO tracker is also used for client bugs (as far as I can > tell?), and there doesn't seem to be a huge amount of tripleo-common > bugs perhaps it would make sense to also track those in the main > tracker? If there is a previous conversation or document about bug > triaging beyond [3] I apologise for missing it (and would love a > URL!). At the moment it's a bit confusing.
Thanks for raising this, yes there is a bit of a proliferation of LP projects, but FWIW the only one I'm using to track coordinated milestone releases for Newton is this one: https://launchpad.net/tripleo/ > If we do encourage using the same bug tracker for multiple components, > I think it would be useful to curate a list of official tags [4]. The > main advantage of doing that is that the tags will auto-complete so > it'd be easier to keep them consistent (and thus actually useful). +1 I'm fine with adding tags, but I would prefer that we stopped adding more LP projects unless the associated repos aren't planned to be part of the coordinated release (e.g I don't have to track them ;) > Personally, I wanted to look through open bugs against > python-tripleoclient but people use different ways of marking them at > the moment - e.g. [tripleoclient] or [python-tripleoclient] or > tripleoclient (or nothing?) in the bug name. I tried my luck at adding > a 'tripleoclient' tag [5] to the obvious ones as an example. Maybe > something shorter like 'cli', 'common' would make more sense. If there > are other tags that come back regularly it'd probably be helpful to > list them explicitly as well. Sure, well I know that many python-*clients do have separate LP projects, but in the case of TripleO our client is quite highly coupled to the the other TripleO pieces, in particular tripleo-common. So my vote is to create some tags in the main tripleo project and use that to filter bugs as needed. There are two projects we might consider removing, tripleo-common, which looks pretty much unused and tripleo-validations which was recently added by the sub-team working on validations. If folks find either useful then they can stay, but it's going to be easier to get a clear view on when to cut a release if we track everything considered part of the tripleo deliverable in one place IMHO. Thanks, Steve > > Julie > > [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo-common > [2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo > [3] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/TripleO#Bug_Triage > [4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Bug_Tags > [5] https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo?field.tag=tripleoclient > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Steve Hardy Red Hat Engineering, Cloud __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
