Proposed changes to workflow bug management

[Emmet Hikory]

Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> I'd encourage anyone with ideas on how avoiding these bugs could be added to
>> the standard bug triage workflow in a reasonable way to discuss it on the
>> bugsquad mailing list.  Perhaps there's another way that'll be effective for
>> them that doesn't impact to extensively on the existing workflow.
>
> I proposed before UDS to assign these workflow bugs to teams (e.g.
> ubuntu-archive for confirmed syncs, ubuntu-{universe,main}-sponsors for
> sponsorship requests, ubuntu-mir for MIR reports...
>
> I was told bugsquad list of bugs exclude bugs with an assignee (and bugs with
> status >= In Progress), so if that's true, this might be a good way. I
> personally don't like the idea of making them private...
>
> What does people (specially those in affected teams like ubuntu-archive) think
> about this approach?

    I have three objections to this approach, as follows:

1)  It is not always the related team that is responsible for the next
action for these bugs, and in cases where more information is
requested, not always the last person to work on the bug who ought
respond.

2)  As assignment is typically used to indicate "I'm working on this",
this use of assignment may create the false impression that things are
in progress which nobody is tracking closely, or for which nobody
feels specific responsibility, and so are available as general work
items.

3)  Due to the way in which launchpad works, notification for
assignees is very different than notification for subscribers.  As a
result, such a change further impacts the workflows and teams, and may
require the creation of supporting mailing lists, etc. in order to
ensure that team members are receiving mail appropriately.

-- 
Emmet HIKORY