Low bug triage activity all around

[Omer Akram]

On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 4:36 AM, Thomas Ward <teward at ubuntu.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Omer Akram <om26er at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>
> > That may be a factor but I have seen closely no activity in #ubuntu-bugs
> for
> > a while which is not good
>
> In the time since i started lurking there, there's been a decent bit
> of activity.  From my observations (and courtesy of a
> very-long-and-time-consuming grep on over 500MB of log files for
> freenode), your username (om26er) is not in the channel 24/7, thereby
> your username is not usually active in the channel if/when there's
> activity.  I've witnessed a substantial (not huge amount, but still
> substantial) quantity of activity related to bugs, or related to bug
> documentation, or related to bugsquad bug handling things, in
> #ubuntu-bugs, whether initiated by bugsquad, or initiated by a bug
> control member, or initiated by a member of some other team.  There's
> sufficient activity in the channel to qualify it as "active".  It is
> true, the past month or so there's little or no activity, however
> there is still sufficient activity there that its "active".  But,
> remember, it IS the holidays right now, so there's bound to be less
> activity.
>

Believe me I have seen far more activity in that channel, though my timing
here is just after holidays but the intent of this thread has nothing to do
with holidays, I was away for the whole week myself. The real problem is
previously people were seeking help in #ubuntu-bugs and asking bug
controllers questions and in some cases asking them to set importance of
bugs for them, that's not happening as frequent as that used to.

Also When I am working I am always online so that's ~40hours a week ;)


>
> Usually, bug work tends to drag me out of #ubuntu-bugs and into other
> channels, such as #kubuntu or #lubuntu or #ubuntuforums or #ubuntu or
> others.  So while #ubuntu-bugs is not always active, there is triaging
> going on behind the scenes.  Not all Ubuntuers use IRC, and those that
> do usually get forwarded to the bugsquad channel where applicable.
> But BugSquad isn't limited to just that channel.  They're all over the
> place: they're on QA, they're on developers, they're on Ubuntu+1,
> they're on MOTU, they're on the Server Team ... i could go on with
> that list but I won't, because the list is extremely extensive.
>
> >>
> >>I'm also seeing signs there are a few of the regulars who've tried
> >>Raring on their machine and find it's failed very early on in the kernel
> >>and haven't been able to find a working solution to carry on, and have
> >>just gone and ignored it for the moment.
> >
> >
> >then I am lucky raring works just fine for me just few glitches here and
> there but thats expected at this stage i guess.
>
> While BugSquaders should indeed be on the latest dev release (or at
> the very least have a VM with it), not all of us do.  I personally do
> not because my primary work on Bugs drags me to server packages in
> Quantal and Precise, and because I don't have a system that can run
> Raring or Raring in a VM without technical troubles.  I also have old
> testing systems I usually install the latest dev release to at some
> point, but the kernel doesn't have drivers for the hardware in those
> systems, so Raring doesn't work  (these're OLD systems).
>
> >> I have been involved in bug triage for a while in Ubuntu and it seems
> this
> >> scene is not that active it used to be although alot of great folks from
> >> our community are highly devoted.
>
> Okay, I know i'm digging up logs somewhat far back in the email chain
> about this, but a lot of triaging happens behind-the-scenes.  And its
> not just Bug Squad that does the triaging.  Most server packages were
> shunted off to the Server Team a while ago, and I can guarantee you
> there is extremely high activity levels for triaging those.  I've been
> one of those people, at least with certain packages.  Usually I don't
> do desktop triaging work, short of filing bugs.
>

I would not agree to that because if you dig up bugs for some packages like
rhythmbox or Totem you can clearly see the ever increasing number of NEW
bugs. Even though your argument about server maybe correct but the
situation for the desktop packages which are considered relatively easy for
triage could be very much improved

>
> ------
>
> Okay, enough with me responding to you, Omer.  As for suggestions, I
> agree with David that we need another round of patch triaging.
> There's a ton of patches that have gone unprocessed / unchecked.  But
> as David said, these patches won't make it into Debian for a while,
> especially since they're under a freeze.
>
> As for the rest of my suggestions, we should probably start looking at
> Universe packages for a while.  There's a lot of bugs in universe
> packages that have not been fixed, nor sent up to Debian, nor sent
> upstream.  As well, there's also packages that have not been updated
> in years which suggests that there's not been any work done on those
> packages, upstream or otherwise.  We may want to coordinate with MOTU
> and start figuring out which Universe packages are no longer
> maintained in Debian or otherwise, and perhaps work with the Security
> team to see whether security bugs in Universe packages are causing
> substantial security holes, and work to patch, or find patches, for
> those packages.
>
>
> Just my two cents on this matter :)
>
> ------
> Thomas Ward
> Ubuntu Member
> Ubuntu BugSquader
>
> --
> Ubuntu-bugsquad mailing list
> Ubuntu-bugsquad at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugsquad
>

Thanks!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-bugsquad/attachments/20130102/330ed2ae/attachment.html>