IRC office hours/Office hours 2013-03-19

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
17:01:11 <andre__>	Welcome everybody to the IRC Office Hour on Wikimedia's issue tracker ( https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org ) and Bug management ( https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Bug_management ). If you'd like to know how to better find information in Bugzilla that interests you, if you have ideas and criticism how to make Bugzilla better, this is now the time for it!
17:01:53 *	greg-g waves
17:01:57 <lizzard>	Hello!
17:02:56 <marktraceur>	Good morning from sunny CA, andre__!
17:03:05 <andre__>	heja! :)
17:03:35 *	andre__ happily waiting for Bugzilla and Bug Management comments here :)
17:04:18 <lizzard>	I have not used wikimedia's bugzilla implementation enough to have a big opinion, but am looking at your list of bugs to triage !
17:04:19 <marktraceur>	andre__: Oh, are we just shouting out questions and problems? Or do you have a spiel?
17:04:36 <valeriej>	Hello all!
17:04:38 <andre__>	Sorry, I didn't prepare a speech, no :)
17:04:44 <marktraceur>	Heh.
17:04:46 <lizzard>	do you have a page where you say what kinds of extensions and things you are running that make it any different from out-of-the-box bugzilla?
17:05:06 <marktraceur>	andre__: In that case, how's the process of puppetizing wikibugs so we can split off some of the noise of bug-reports into separate IRC channels?
17:05:11 <andre__>	though it's on my todo list to prepare a series of small postings explaining easy ways to get more out of Bugzilla. Saved Searches etc.
17:06:32 <andre__>	marktraceur, I'm not aware of any recent work on the IRC bots, though there's enough discussion. *If* there's some discussions about it, then likely in some of the tickets here: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?resolution=---&query_format=advanced&component=wikibugs IRC bot
17:06:51 <andre__>	ah, Firefox and handling %20... again: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?resolution=---&query_format=advanced&component=wikibugs%20IRC%20bot
17:07:59 <marktraceur>	andre__: There are actually patches in for a lot of the splitting-off...I guess I should bug ops, as ever.
17:08:19 <andre__>	lizzard: I don't think so, unfortunately. :-( This would be way easier to create once we'd have Bugzilla puppetized (just managing a bunch of patches). Which would require a Debian package for Bugzilla. Which does not exist anymore. :-(
17:09:03 <andre__>	lizzard, we have https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/gitweb?p=wikimedia/bugzilla/modifications.git;a=tree;f=bugzilla-4.2 though
17:09:17 <andre__>	...which is manually (*cough*) kept in sync with the server code
17:09:56 <andre__>	marktraceur: yeah, likely... though that might also touch merging wm-bot and wikibugs
17:10:40 <andre__>	lizzard, some code-related plans for Wikimedia Bugzilla are listed on https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Bug_management/Task_list#Plans_for_Q2.2F2013 , section "Bugzilla setup / code"
17:10:47 <lizzard>	andre: thanks!
17:11:38 <andre__>	lizzard, if you are after getting a list of extensions deployed on a certain public bugzilla installation, you can query via the RPC interface
17:12:00 <andre__>	for example:
17:12:04 <andre__>	curl -X POST -H"Content-Type: text/xml" -d "<?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"UTF-8\"?><methodCall><methodName>Bugzilla.extensions</methodName><params><param><value><struct><member><name>names</name><value></value></member></struct></value></param></params></methodCall>" https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/xmlrpc.cgi
17:13:00 <andre__>	marktraceur: Hmm, are people running office hours "normally" expected to prepare a bit more of an agenda? if so, I should probably do that for next time :)
17:13:24 <marktraceur>	andre__: Not necessarily an agenda, but I've seen people give a spiel at the beginning pretty frequently
17:13:37 <marktraceur>	andre__: The language folks will do updates and brief presentations, that sort of thing
17:13:43 <Ironholds>	andre__: it depends. some context for 'why are you talking to us when the channel title says it's language engineering' is always useful.
17:14:52 <sumanah>	andre__: I think a short list of suggested topics is a good thing to start with, yes
17:15:03 <sumanah>	especially if there are decisions to be made that you need consensus on
17:15:21 <andre__>	I see... thanks, it's my first office hour :)
17:15:43 <andre__>	Decisions to get consensus on? https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46020 comes to my mind: Rename "Normal" priority to "Medium" priority in Bugzilla
17:15:52 <Ironholds>	andre__: if it makes you feel better, the first time I held office hours I converted timezones wrongly
17:16:03 <Ironholds>	I turned up an hour before the editors who turned up an hour before the rest of the staffers ;p
17:16:05 <andre__>	Ironholds, hehe :)
17:16:08 <sumanah>	in my case, I will take this as an opportunity to ask about https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/42089/ and https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22170 -- customizing the BZ front page to make it more useful
17:16:28 <sumanah>	andre__: I'm fine with renaming "normal" to "medium" yes.
17:16:58 <sgardner>	(hey people, I don't mean to interrupt, and you can ignore me. I am just dropped off a URL for anyone who's passively monitoring the channel and might be interested: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Sue_Gardner/Wikimedia_Foundation_Guiding_Principles)
17:17:05 <sgardner>	(Pardon the interruption :-))
17:17:09 <andre__>	heh
17:17:16 <sgardner>	*dropping not dropped
17:17:29 <andre__>	sumanah: That frontpage patch needs more testing/fixing (e.g. looks bad on Chrome) and I need to do that. The bigger problem is that there's no Labs instance yet to test such Bugzilla code changes, so I've been testing locally only. Which isn't that great.
17:18:07 <andre__>	so I want to get that fixed in the next three months.
17:18:17 <andre__>	also listed on https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Bug_management/Task_list#Plans_for_Q2.2F2013
17:19:09 *	marktraceur has changed the topic to: 2013-03-19 - Bugzilla office hours with your host, Andre Klapper. We'll be 17:20:34 <andre__>	oh true, the IRC topic... thanks!
17:20:53 <andre__>	ah, so https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/53973/ is about puppetizing the wikibugs IRC bot. I see.
17:23:05 <andre__>	so, whoever is in the mood for discussing: Another interesting idea might be to introduce a NEEDINFO bug status, when there is information missing from the reporter. This is https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36064
17:23:28 <andre__>	and I was told that at least the Language Engineering team would like to have a way to tag bug reports as "needs more information" or "stalled".
17:23:56 <andre__>	some Bugzilla have such a status (like GNOME and KDE), other Bugzillas (Mozilla) use a so-called "flag" (a dropdown) for that.
17:26:36 <andre__>	...but I guess I'll need to ask some more teams to decide whether to do that or not, vs. making things more complicated by adding yet another status. (Though adding it as a status would be very easy, technically)
17:27:04 <sumanah>	My vote: do what makes sense to you. You own this. :)
17:28:08 <sumanah>	lizzard: how does Mozilla deploy its BZ? does it run off a package of some sort, or just manually?
17:28:43 <MatmaRex>	andre__: wouldn't UNCONFIRMED fit?
17:28:59 <lizzard>	sumanah: it is pretty complicated setup, let me find you a diagram
17:29:03 <sumanah>	oh wow
17:29:37 <lizzard>	sumanah: this is out of date, but will get the idea across I think http://www.justdave.net/dave/2011/05/04/the-hardware-behind-bugzilla-mozilla-org/
17:29:49 <sumanah>	also, Andre, what help could you use in getting the Wikimedia Labs environment https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Nova_Resource:I-000004de into a state where it's useful for testing improvements to Bugzilla?
17:30:13 <lizzard>	i should find an updated one :D
17:30:51 <sumanah>	thank you lizzard
17:31:40 <andre__>	MatmaRex, hmm, that's an interesting idea - does "unconfirmed" mean that it's not clear whether the issue exists and whether it's a real "bug" in our code / setup, or can it also mean "nobody else has seen this problem yet" or "not enough info yet or anymore to confirm it"?
17:32:02 <andre__>	lately I prefer the latter interpretation, but I'm probably a minority.
17:32:02 <MatmaRex>	andre__: i think it's a bit of both
17:32:06 <MatmaRex>	but i rarely see it used
17:32:18 <andre__>	MatmaRex, also, "Please retest this after these changes" would mean to reset it to UNCONFIRMED? 
17:32:25 <andre__>	it's an interesting idea.
17:32:29 <MatmaRex>	i'd say it means that no one apart from the reporter confirmed it - ie, non-reproducible
17:32:46 <MatmaRex>	(or not reproduced yet)
17:33:07 <MatmaRex>	it might also mean that no one (yet) agreed with the reports whether the subject of the report is actually an issue
17:33:08 <andre__>	sumanah: mutante offered me some help with setting it up. I guess as the first step, I should read up on Labs documentation to understand better what I'm expected to do (and as a side effect, check how good the documentation is)
17:33:09 <marktraceur>	andre__: Would it be possible to more closely tie Gerrit and Bugzilla? e.g. watch the Gerrit stream for patches marked with Bug: xxxxx and auto-link them somehow?
17:33:17 <lizzard>	MatmaRex: my question is usually, well, i can reproduce it , but am still not sure if it is our bug, or someone else's bug
17:33:29 <andre__>	marktraceur, yes, that's on the way: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17322
17:34:04 <MatmaRex>	lizzard: i'd say that's not UNCONFIRMED, just a bug, possibly one that should get an 'upstream' keyword once it's figured out on our side
17:34:13 *	MatmaRex 's not a bugmeister, though.
17:35:05 <marktraceur>	Awesome.
17:35:18 <andre__>	MatmaRex, on the other hand, NEEDINFO means "stalled" or "needs info from somebody before anything else can be done". That doesn't feel like UNCONFIRMED to me.
17:35:32 <andre__>	Still the question "Can UNCONFIRMED be used for what NEEDINFO is in some other bugtrackers?" is something really good to think about
17:36:56 <sumanah>	Right now, the moment a person shows up with a new bug, it's at UNCONFIRMED. Unless we're going to switch that to something else, it's better to have something else that means WE SPECIFICALLY NEED MORE INFO FROM YOU. BLOCKED OTHERWISE.
17:37:10 <sumanah>	YES WE LOOKED AT IT. PLEASE REVISE.
17:38:02 <MatmaRex>	hm, good point.
17:38:32 <andre__>	(it's only UNCONFIRMED on enter_bug.cgi if you don't have editbugs permissions, otherwise the dropdown defaults to NEW)
17:39:29 <sankarshan_CPU>	usage of Unconfirmed is "Bugs with the "Unconfirmed" keyword have been entered into Bugzilla but not yet confirmed by Development that an actual bug exists."
17:39:29 <sumanah>	For searches, and for a skim down a list of bugs, we won't be able to tell "oh this would be NEW except the person's unprivileged"
17:39:35 <sankarshan_CPU>	https://bugzilla.redhat.com/describekeywords.cgi
17:39:40 <sankarshan_CPU>	(as an example(
17:40:06 <sumanah>	so that's a keyword, over there in RedHat land. :)
17:40:08 <andre__>	sankarshan_CPU, uh, RedHat has a keyword for that, instead of a status? interesting.
17:40:21 <sumanah>	https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/describekeywords.cgi includes "testme - This bug needs to be re-confirmed to check if it is still present in the latest alpha version of MediaWiki."
17:41:23 <sankarshan_CPU>	http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow is the one from Fedora land .. andre__
17:41:25 <andre__>	yeah, but testme is a more general keyword for "old stuff that should be retested" but there's no indication that a developer couldn't pick it up and fix it - it's not necessarily asking a specific person for more information like NEEDINFO would be.
17:41:31 <andre__>	sankarshan_CPU, thanks
17:42:18 <sumanah>	you're right andre__
17:42:40 <sumanah>	ok, so it sounds like andre__ needs to do a little checking of other Bugzilla installations, make a decision, & implement it :)
17:42:42 <andre__>	but they are not disjunct, yeah...
17:43:12 <andre__>	heh, that was on my todo list anyway (though so far not on my "work" todo list)
17:49:37 <sumanah>	lizzard: "For example, every so often a major bug will get fixed (or some controversy will arise from one) and a bug will get linked from major news sources." from the link you gave
17:49:41 <sumanah>	http://www.justdave.net/dave/2011/05/04/the-hardware-behind-bugzilla-mozilla-org/
17:49:41 <sumanah>	wow!
17:50:39 <sumanah>	so, andre__ maybe I missed some of the links you mentioned earlier, where you talked about what you're working on next & need help with
17:50:41 <sumanah>	re BZ
17:52:15 <andre__>	Basically I try to outline plans on https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Bug_management/Task_list now, though the lower sections still needs way more cleanup
17:52:52 <andre__>	the big things for the next quarter are to improve communication with development teams and users (plus find out needs when it comes to Bugzilla, and this office hour is one part of it),
17:53:09 <andre__>	and getting some code changes in like a better frontpage (which means setting up a Labs instance for testing)
17:53:34 <andre__>	In short term, I'd like to get https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/53387/ in to list highest and immediate priority Bugzilla tickets in the "Bugzilla Weekly report" email on wikitech-l.
17:54:54 <andre__>	but once I've cleaned up and structured https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Bug_management/Task_list a bit more, anybody should be able to pick an item and help.
17:55:21 <sumanah>	Nod. :)
17:55:25 <andre__>	e.g. in the "Clean up / closing of components" section, anybody could help.
19:01:15 <andre__>	Okay then...
19:01:19 <andre__>	Thanks everybody who took part in this Bugzilla/Bug management office hour!
19:01:25 <andre__>	It was very interesting and helpful, and I plan to host this once a month from now on.
19:01:36 <andre__>	And if something else comes to your mind don't hesitate to contact me via email or IRC.
19:01:40 <andre__>	and now switching back to the LiquidThreads bugday which is going on in #wikimedia-dev ...
</pre>