VERIFIED vs CLOSED in yocto bugzilla

VERIFIED vs CLOSED in yocto bugzilla

[Serban, Laurentiu]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 920 bytes --]

Hello,

I submit to your attention the following issue related to Yocto project's bugzilla:

Which is the most appropriate end for a the lifecycle of a bugzilla issue: VERIFIED or CLOSED?
Currently the bug lifecycle final point is VERIFIED and the status CLOSED is not used. Setting a bug to CLOSED after it was VERIFIED has no impact on the lifecycle itself as the bug can be reopened anyway.

My proposal is the following: keep VERIFIED as the final point of the bug lifecycle and use the status CLOSED for the bug only after the 1.3 release, if the regression testing for the bug is ran and passed.
So after the 1.3 release the ideal situation is that all the bugs related to it with previous status VERIFIED are CLOSED.

Waiting for your opinion on this,
Thank you,

Laurentiu Serban
QA Engineer
Open Source Technology Center
System Software Division Romania
Desk: +40 31 8604742
iNET: 88451042


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4060 bytes --]

Re: VERIFIED vs CLOSED in yocto bugzilla

[Khem Raj]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1202 bytes --]

On Tuesday, June 19, 2012, Serban, Laurentiu <laurentiu.serban@intel.com>
wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
>
> I submit to your attention the following issue related to Yocto project’s
bugzilla:
>
>
>
> Which is the most appropriate end for a the lifecycle of a bugzilla
issue: VERIFIED or CLOSED?
>
> Currently the bug lifecycle final point is VERIFIED and the status CLOSED
is not used. Setting a bug to CLOSED after it was VERIFIED has no impact on
the lifecycle itself as the bug can be reopened anyway.
>
>
>
> My proposal is the following: keep VERIFIED as the final point of the bug
lifecycle and use the status CLOSED for the bug only after the 1.3 release,
if the regression testing for the bug is ran and passed.
>
> So after the 1.3 release the ideal situation is that all the bugs related
to it with previous status VERIFIED are CLOSED.
>
>
>
> Waiting for your opinion on this,
>

Closed is something for the original submitter IMO
He should be the one to mark the bug closed
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> Laurentiu Serban
>
> QA Engineer
>
> Open Source Technology Center
>
> System Software Division Romania
>
> Desk: +40 31 8604742
>
> iNET: 88451042
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1486 bytes --]

Re: VERIFIED vs CLOSED in yocto bugzilla

[Darren Hart]

On 06/19/2012 12:25 PM, Serban, Laurentiu wrote:
> Hello,
> 
>  
> 
> I submit to your attention the following issue related to Yocto
> project’s bugzilla:
> 
>  
> 
> Which is the most appropriate end for a the lifecycle of a bugzilla
> issue: VERIFIED or CLOSED?
> 
> Currently the bug lifecycle final point is VERIFIED and the status
> CLOSED is not used. Setting a bug to CLOSED after it was VERIFIED has no
> impact on the lifecycle itself as the bug can be reopened anyway.
> 
>  
> 
> My proposal is the following: keep VERIFIED as the final point of the
> bug lifecycle and use the status CLOSED for the bug only after the 1.3
> release, *if* the regression testing for the bug is ran and passed.
> 
> So after the 1.3 release the ideal situation is that all the bugs
> related to it with previous status VERIFIED are CLOSED.

What is the reasoning driving this change? What does CLOSED indicate
that VERIFIED does not already convey?

Thanks,

Darren

> 
>  
> 
> Waiting for your opinion on this,
> 
> Thank you,
> 
>  
> 
> *Laurentiu Serban*
> 
> QA Engineer
> 
> Open Source Technology Center
> 
> System Software Division Romania
> 
> Desk: +40 31 8604742**
> 
> iNET: 88451042
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
> 

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel

Re: VERIFIED vs CLOSED in yocto bugzilla

[Serban, Laurentiu]

The discussion was triggered in the Yocto Project Technical Team Meeting from June 19th.


-----Original Message-----
From: Darren Hart [mailto:dvhart@linux.intel.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 2:23 AM
To: Serban, Laurentiu
Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org
Subject: Re: [yocto] VERIFIED vs CLOSED in yocto bugzilla



On 06/19/2012 12:25 PM, Serban, Laurentiu wrote:
> Hello,
> 
>  
> 
> I submit to your attention the following issue related to Yocto 
> project's bugzilla:
> 
>  
> 
> Which is the most appropriate end for a the lifecycle of a bugzilla
> issue: VERIFIED or CLOSED?
> 
> Currently the bug lifecycle final point is VERIFIED and the status 
> CLOSED is not used. Setting a bug to CLOSED after it was VERIFIED has 
> no impact on the lifecycle itself as the bug can be reopened anyway.
> 
>  
> 
> My proposal is the following: keep VERIFIED as the final point of the 
> bug lifecycle and use the status CLOSED for the bug only after the 1.3 
> release, *if* the regression testing for the bug is ran and passed.
> 
> So after the 1.3 release the ideal situation is that all the bugs 
> related to it with previous status VERIFIED are CLOSED.

What is the reasoning driving this change? What does CLOSED indicate that VERIFIED does not already convey?

Thanks,

Darren

> 
>  
> 
> Waiting for your opinion on this,
> 
> Thank you,
> 
>  
> 
> *Laurentiu Serban*
> 
> QA Engineer
> 
> Open Source Technology Center
> 
> System Software Division Romania
> 
> Desk: +40 31 8604742**
> 
> iNET: 88451042
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
> 

--
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel

Re: VERIFIED vs CLOSED in yocto bugzilla

[Burton, Ross]

On 20 June 2012 00:22, Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> What is the reasoning driving this change? What does CLOSED indicate
> that VERIFIED does not already convey?

Agreed -- hiding CLOSED would be my proposal as it doesn't add any
meaning, just complicates the lifecycle.

Ross

Re: VERIFIED vs CLOSED in yocto bugzilla

[Khem Raj]

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:18 AM, Burton, Ross <ross.burton@intel.com> wrote:
>
> Agreed -- hiding CLOSED would be my proposal as it doesn't add any
> meaning, just complicates the lifecycle.

I think yes hiding closed it ok since it does not change much in fix.
I wouldnt say it complicates but it completes the life cycle
since the owner for closing action is submitter. it closes the life
cycle nicely.

Re: VERIFIED vs CLOSED in yocto bugzilla

[Saul Wold]

On 06/20/2012 08:27 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:18 AM, Burton, Ross<ross.burton@intel.com>  wrote:
>>
>> Agreed -- hiding CLOSED would be my proposal as it doesn't add any
>> meaning, just complicates the lifecycle.
>
> I think yes hiding closed it ok since it does not change much in fix.
> I wouldnt say it complicates but it completes the life cycle
> since the owner for closing action is submitter. it closes the life
> cycle nicely.

The bug verification is the responsibility of the submitter, not the 
assignee/owner. So there could be 2 actions here, one is the submitter 
has verified this (added any test cases to testoipa for future 
regression testing. The second is, as Laurentiu suggests, marking closed 
by the QA team when releases does it's final regression testing.

So yes, I could see hiding CLOSED and leaving the final state as 
VERIFIED, but I can see further value of using the CLOSED state to 
indicate that it passed regression at the end of the release cycle.

So this should also act as a reminder to submitters to "verify" there bugs!


Sau!


> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>
>

Re: VERIFIED vs CLOSED in yocto bugzilla

[Khem Raj]

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Saul Wold <sgw@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> The bug verification is the responsibility of the submitter, not the
> assignee/owner.

ok, in some workflows verified is owned by testting/qa person, I was
assuming that
when testing validates the bug fix it sets the state to verified and
owner back to original
submitter.

what you describe then verified and closed are almost same in yocto's
bug flow so one
can be traded for other or different meaning assigned to say closed.