[webkit-dev] Cherry-Pick Bug Comments

[Eric Seidel]

It seems that whole discussion resolves around the same problem of
cherry-picking causing too much bug noise. :)

It would be very easy to store the "is this on the branch" bit off on a
separate server.  If someone could describe in greater detail the Qt release
process, I suspect we could easily design a separate store for this data
(and tools to manipulate it).  The current system you all are using has no
way to do multi-bug queries it seems.  You can't answer the question "how
many bugs aren't merged", or?  And to check if a bug is merged you have to
load the whole bug and look for the special comment?

-eric

On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 4:28 AM, Antonio Gomes <tonikitoo at gmail.com> wrote:

> We had this exactly discussion in qtwebkit mailing list days ago:
> https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-qt/2011-May/001555.html . It is
> worth reading through if you are interested in this topic!
>
> We would really like to reduce the noise of "management bugmails", but
> without a clear good solution for now yet. The "silent" comments suggested
> by Evan would be a great alternative to the problem if bugzilla could get
> expanded to support it, imo...
>
>
> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 7:05 PM, Evan Martin <evan at chromium.org> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:54 PM, Eric Seidel <eric at webkit.org> wrote:
>> > I get a lot of these:
>> > Revision r86028 cherry-picked into qtwebkit-2.2 with commit 7e1bab1
>> > <http://gitorious.org/webkit/qtwebkit/commit/7e1bab1>
>> > as bug mail.  Probably because I'm CC'd on a zillion bugs (and actually
>> read
>> > my bug mail).
>> >
>> > This is probably the pot calling the kettle black, since I wrote many of
>> the
>> > bots which comment daily on bugs...
>> > ...but, I'm wondering if we can do better?
>> > Would it better serve the cherry-picker's needs if we instead had a
>> separate
>> > server to track revision -> cherry-picks?  Or bug ids -> cherry-picks?
>> (Like
>> > how the EWS bots store their status on queues.webkit.org and display it
>> in
>> > little bubbles on bugs.webkit.org w/o commenting on the bugs.)
>> >
>> > I'm strongly supportive of all clients of webkit storing all of their
>> > bug-related data in bugs.webkit.org.  It's better than the alternative
>> (lots
>> > of data buried in old Radars, or Chromium bugs, etc.)
>> > But perhaps someone has a good idea how to reduce unnecessary bugmail?
>>
>> I've seen some bug trackers reduce email by allowing you to comment
>> without sending email.  In effect you're just attaching metadata to
>> the bug without notifying everyone about it.
>>
>> However, the comments left by the EWS are intended for the bug authors
>> and so they probably should continue sending mail.
>> _______________________________________________
>> webkit-dev mailing list
>> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
>> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --Antonio Gomes
>
> _______________________________________________
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/attachments/20110527/c5c716e6/attachment.html>