Could we send all of the unorphan, unretire, revive etc issues to a different repo than https://pagure.io/releng/? I like to follow and participate in releng discussions but the number of those recently has been a bit unwieldy and they all go to the mailing list.
Dusty
On 9/5/19 9:30 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
Could we send all of the unorphan, unretire, revive etc issues to a different repo than https://pagure.io/releng/? I like to follow and participate in releng discussions but the number of those recently has been a bit unwieldy and they all go to the mailing list.
Yeah, I'd be ok with this. I mean anyone who wants those can just watch the project in pagure.
Lets discuss this at next meeting and if no objections change it?
kevin
On 9/6/19 1:31 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On 9/5/19 9:30 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
Could we send all of the unorphan, unretire, revive etc issues to a different repo than https://pagure.io/releng/? I like to follow and participate in releng discussions but the number of those recently has been a bit unwieldy and they all go to the mailing list.
Yeah, I'd be ok with this. I mean anyone who wants those can just watch the project in pagure.
Just to be clear, you'd be OK with creating a new repo for those types of requests?
Lets discuss this at next meeting and if no objections change it?
Sounds good to me. How do we get it on the agenda?
Dusty
On 9/6/19 10:45 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
On 9/6/19 1:31 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On 9/5/19 9:30 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
Could we send all of the unorphan, unretire, revive etc issues to a different repo than https://pagure.io/releng/? I like to follow and participate in releng discussions but the number of those recently has been a bit unwieldy and they all go to the mailing list.
Yeah, I'd be ok with this. I mean anyone who wants those can just watch the project in pagure.
Just to be clear, you'd be OK with creating a new repo for those types of requests?
No, sorry, let me be more clear:
I'd be ok with NOT copying the rel-eng list on all the releng pagure requests. I think moving those requests to another repo might be confusing to people. Hopefully a number of them should go away when we implement the plugins to handle orphan stuff.
Lets discuss this at next meeting and if no objections change it?
Sounds good to me. How do we get it on the agenda?
Ticket with a meeting keyword has always been the method. (Although I see we have a ton of them with that, so we either need to clean that up, or figure out how Mohan wants to mark them. ;)
kevin
On 9/7/19 1:11 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On 9/6/19 10:45 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
On 9/6/19 1:31 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On 9/5/19 9:30 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
Could we send all of the unorphan, unretire, revive etc issues to a different repo than https://pagure.io/releng/? I like to follow and participate in releng discussions but the number of those recently has been a bit unwieldy and they all go to the mailing list.
Yeah, I'd be ok with this. I mean anyone who wants those can just watch the project in pagure.
Just to be clear, you'd be OK with creating a new repo for those types of requests?
No, sorry, let me be more clear:
I'm glad I asked for clarification :)
I'd be ok with NOT copying the rel-eng list on all the releng pagure requests. I think moving those requests to another repo might be confusing to people. Hopefully a number of them should go away when we implement the plugins to handle orphan stuff.
ehh. I'd be ok with not copying rel-eng list on all the releng pagure requests but then the releng list will pretty much be very very low volume so I don't know if it will really achieve any goals because anyone who wants to be involved will have to subscribe to the pagure repo AND the list.
As far as confusing people, is it that big of a problem? I'm sure they end up opening an issue against the releng repo because of some documentation somewhere that we could just update. https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests does exist.
Lets discuss this at next meeting and if no objections change it?
Sounds good to me. How do we get it on the agenda?
Ticket with a meeting keyword has always been the method. (Although I see we have a ton of them with that, so we either need to clean that up, or figure out how Mohan wants to mark them. ;)
+1
On 9/7/19 12:54 PM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
On 9/7/19 1:11 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On 9/6/19 10:45 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
On 9/6/19 1:31 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On 9/5/19 9:30 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
Could we send all of the unorphan, unretire, revive etc issues to a different repo than https://pagure.io/releng/? I like to follow and participate in releng discussions but the number of those recently has been a bit unwieldy and they all go to the mailing list.
Yeah, I'd be ok with this. I mean anyone who wants those can just watch the project in pagure.
Just to be clear, you'd be OK with creating a new repo for those types of requests?
No, sorry, let me be more clear:
I'm glad I asked for clarification :)
I'd be ok with NOT copying the rel-eng list on all the releng pagure requests. I think moving those requests to another repo might be confusing to people. Hopefully a number of them should go away when we implement the plugins to handle orphan stuff.
ehh. I'd be ok with not copying rel-eng list on all the releng pagure requests but then the releng list will pretty much be very very low volume so I don't know if it will really achieve any goals because anyone who wants to be involved will have to subscribe to the pagure repo AND the list.
Well, then I don't understand your goals. If we stop copying the list on all pagure requests the list will be low volume and a place you can have discussions, right? You only need to also subscribe to pagure issues if you care about those, and you can also then filter them into a different place more easily.
The current setup is not ideal for me because I get 2 copies of everything in pagure (one from pagure and one to the list). It just seems like duplication to me... and I agree lists posts are lost in the sea of ticket copies.
Moving those things to another pagure repo doesn't seem like it would help anything. It would just make me get a different copy of all those, and interested people would need to subscribe there anyhow.
so, to me, the thing that makes the most sense is to stop copying all the tickets to the list and let the list be usable for more discussions.
kevin
On 9/9/19 12:52 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On 9/7/19 12:54 PM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
On 9/7/19 1:11 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On 9/6/19 10:45 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
On 9/6/19 1:31 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On 9/5/19 9:30 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
Could we send all of the unorphan, unretire, revive etc issues to a different repo than https://pagure.io/releng/? I like to follow and participate in releng discussions but the number of those recently has been a bit unwieldy and they all go to the mailing list.
Yeah, I'd be ok with this. I mean anyone who wants those can just watch the project in pagure.
Just to be clear, you'd be OK with creating a new repo for those types of requests?
No, sorry, let me be more clear:
I'm glad I asked for clarification :)
I'd be ok with NOT copying the rel-eng list on all the releng pagure requests. I think moving those requests to another repo might be confusing to people. Hopefully a number of them should go away when we implement the plugins to handle orphan stuff.
ehh. I'd be ok with not copying rel-eng list on all the releng pagure requests but then the releng list will pretty much be very very low volume so I don't know if it will really achieve any goals because anyone who wants to be involved will have to subscribe to the pagure repo AND the list.
Well, then I don't understand your goals. If we stop copying the list on all pagure requests the list will be low volume and a place you can have discussions, right? You only need to also subscribe to pagure issues if you care about those, and you can also then filter them into a different place more easily.
Basically what I'm saying is all pagure issues aren't created equal and there is a class I think we can target to reduce noise (see below).
The current setup is not ideal for me because I get 2 copies of everything in pagure (one from pagure and one to the list). It just seems like duplication to me... and I agree lists posts are lost in the sea of ticket copies.
Yes. This is a problem for me as well. I also get two copies.
Moving those things to another pagure repo doesn't seem like it would help anything. It would just make me get a different copy of all those, and interested people would need to subscribe there anyhow.
There are three communication streams I'm concerned with:
1. releng list posts 2. pagure repo ticket discussion not related to scm requests 3. pagure repo ticket discussion related to scm requests
I think 1+2 are representative of discussions about releng, relevant changes, and potential future. 3. is kind of noise that drowns 1/2 out.
so, to me, the thing that makes the most sense is to stop copying all the tickets to the list and let the list be usable for more discussions.
If you feel that way, then I'd support that decision. Sometimes it can be useful to copy the list so that it's easier for people to follow releng (i.e. they only have to sign up for one thing and they get all the discussions), but adding a "also subscribe to the pagure repo" isn't too bad.
Dusty
On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 1:02 PM Dusty Mabe dusty@dustymabe.com wrote:
There are three communication streams I'm concerned with:
- releng list posts
- pagure repo ticket discussion not related to scm requests
- pagure repo ticket discussion related to scm requests
I think 1+2 are representative of discussions about releng, relevant changes, and potential future. 3. is kind of noise that drowns 1/2 out.
Agreed. I'd like to keep up with 1 and 2 to be aware of things that may impact releases, etc. 3 is noise from my perspective. So removing the list from the Pagure repo doesn't help me because I'd still want to follow the repo to get 2. If it's more work/overhead for the folks actually doing the work, I'll deal with the noise, but if we can separate 2 and 3, it would help folks who lurk.
On 9/9/19 10:34 AM, Ben Cotton wrote:
On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 1:02 PM Dusty Mabe dusty@dustymabe.com wrote:
There are three communication streams I'm concerned with:
- releng list posts
- pagure repo ticket discussion not related to scm requests
- pagure repo ticket discussion related to scm requests
I think 1+2 are representative of discussions about releng, relevant changes, and potential future. 3. is kind of noise that drowns 1/2 out.
Agreed. I'd like to keep up with 1 and 2 to be aware of things that may impact releases, etc. 3 is noise from my perspective. So removing the list from the Pagure repo doesn't help me because I'd still want to follow the repo to get 2. If it's more work/overhead for the folks actually doing the work, I'll deal with the noise, but if we can separate 2 and 3, it would help folks who lurk.
Well, as I mentioned, a lot of the scm requests should hopefully go away or be reduced soon. There's a pagure plugin thats being worked on that IIRC will allow people to just orphan/take orphans, so the only thing that will need to be tickets are unretirements (since that requires unblocking in koji).
So, I suppose we could just wait and see what that does, but dropping the list CC would be personally nice for me. :)
kevin
On 9/9/19 2:14 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On 9/9/19 10:34 AM, Ben Cotton wrote:
On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 1:02 PM Dusty Mabe dusty@dustymabe.com wrote:
There are three communication streams I'm concerned with:
- releng list posts
- pagure repo ticket discussion not related to scm requests
- pagure repo ticket discussion related to scm requests
I think 1+2 are representative of discussions about releng, relevant changes, and potential future. 3. is kind of noise that drowns 1/2 out.
Agreed. I'd like to keep up with 1 and 2 to be aware of things that may impact releases, etc. 3 is noise from my perspective. So removing the list from the Pagure repo doesn't help me because I'd still want to follow the repo to get 2. If it's more work/overhead for the folks actually doing the work, I'll deal with the noise, but if we can separate 2 and 3, it would help folks who lurk.
Well, as I mentioned, a lot of the scm requests should hopefully go away or be reduced soon. There's a pagure plugin thats being worked on that IIRC will allow people to just orphan/take orphans, so the only thing that will need to be tickets are unretirements (since that requires unblocking in koji).
+1 - is that 3 months away? 6 months away? 12 months?
So, I suppose we could just wait and see what that does, but dropping the list CC would be personally nice for me. :)
+1
On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 02:21:14PM -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote:
On 9/9/19 2:14 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On 9/9/19 10:34 AM, Ben Cotton wrote:
On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 1:02 PM Dusty Mabe dusty@dustymabe.com wrote:
There are three communication streams I'm concerned with:
- releng list posts
- pagure repo ticket discussion not related to scm requests
- pagure repo ticket discussion related to scm requests
I think 1+2 are representative of discussions about releng, relevant changes, and potential future. 3. is kind of noise that drowns 1/2 out.
Agreed. I'd like to keep up with 1 and 2 to be aware of things that may impact releases, etc. 3 is noise from my perspective. So removing the list from the Pagure repo doesn't help me because I'd still want to follow the repo to get 2. If it's more work/overhead for the folks actually doing the work, I'll deal with the noise, but if we can separate 2 and 3, it would help folks who lurk.
Well, as I mentioned, a lot of the scm requests should hopefully go away or be reduced soon. There's a pagure plugin thats being worked on that IIRC will allow people to just orphan/take orphans, so the only thing that will need to be tickets are unretirements (since that requires unblocking in koji).
+1 - is that 3 months away? 6 months away? 12 months?
It's already in staging :)
What it needs is some changes to the-new-hotness to make use of the integration that plugin also offers with it. (And a script to migrate the info from the current git repo into the database).
Pierre
On 9/5/19 12:30 PM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
Could we send all of the unorphan, unretire, revive etc issues to a different repo than https://pagure.io/releng/? I like to follow and participate in releng discussions but the number of those recently has been a bit unwieldy and they all go to the mailing list.
Just an example of the problem I'm dealing with. See the below linked image to see what my unread emails from the releng list looked like this morning:
rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Ben Cotton -
Dusty Mabe -
Kevin Fenzi -
Pierre-Yves Chibon