#552 ✓resolved
Jonathan Stott (namelessjon)

The lighthouse is out of date

Reported by Jonathan Stott (namelessjon) | September 5th, 2008 @ 10:31 AM

Examples

  • we still have a 0.9.2 milestone. With two tickets open, despite the gem release at the time of writing this being 0.9.5
  • It's hard to go through and check tickets, but I am not sure all of the 121 open tickets are valid. A lot of the them are new, rather than open

I think it reflects poorly on the project that our issue tracker is in such a state of disarray, as well as this making it harder to find real issues.

Comments and changes to this ticket

  • Dan Kubb (dkubb)

    Dan Kubb (dkubb) November 28th, 2008 @ 02:49 AM

    • State changed from “new” to “open”
    • Assigned user cleared.

    Jon: I'm interested in starting to clean this up. What do you think the first steps should be?

    I'll be away all next week, but if you want to take on organizing people who want to help with DM to review and see if the tickets still apply, I would be extremely happy. Even a message to the mailing list would go a long way.

    There's a ton of people who want to start helping DM, but for whatever reason the code and specs is still a bit intimidating to them. Reviewing the tickets and see if they still apply would be a perfect low-barrier-to-entry task for people to get started with DM.

    Today I created a search called "Non-closed tickets" so that we could work from the oldest to the newest, keeping the focus on closing some of the old stuff first. I'm sure much of it doesn't apply anymore.

    It would also be a good idea to contact Rick from Lighthouse to see if he can set the "updated" date for the tickets properly. It looks like the migration "touched" each of the tickets and made them all appear 2 days old. If we knew the actual true last-updated date, then we could become a bit more ruthless is closing tickets with no activity.

  • Dan Kubb (dkubb)

    Dan Kubb (dkubb) November 30th, 2008 @ 01:16 PM

    • Assigned user set to “Dan Kubb (dkubb)”

    Jon, I thought perhaps I'd post a few ideas I had about improving the state of Lighthouse. If you like we can discuss this on the mailing list, but I wanted to get my idea down before I forget.

    • We should update the DM Lighthouse welcome page with some instructions on how to post tickets:

      • What makes a good title
      • When to include [PATCH] in it
      • If you want to make someone responsible for a ticket that you should ask them first
      • The descriptions and tags should be simple and concise
      • An attached failing spec or stand-alone script should be attached demonstrating the issue in a repeatable manner (with perhaps a link to a gist template)
    • We should also explain the workflow for resolving tickets:

      • All tickets are in the new state when started.
      • A new ticket means that it is not yet reviewed.
      • Once you view a ticket you should mark it as either open, hold, resolved or invalid.
        • Open means that it's being actively worked on and is not pending any information.
        • On hold means it is pending information from the reporter
        • Resolved means that it has been fixed since the reporter submitted the ticket.
        • Invalid means it no longer applies, or was not relevant in the first place.
      • Tickets should be processed from least active to most active.. so basically oldest to newest. We need to clear our the backlog before we can proceed with answering new tickets quickly.
      • If possible when moving to Open you should assign it to someone after asking them in IRC. Otherwise assign it to yourself. If you can't do it, and no one else is on IRC who is able to help, assign them to me.
      • We should be ruthless in closing tickets. For example if we are able to personally verify the ticket is resolved, then we should mark it as resolved with a note for the reporter to confirm, and if they have any problems to respond so we can reopen it.
    • We should clean out the old milestones and create new ones that are applicable to our current situation.

    • We should think about creating sub-projects, like Merb's done, for some of the plugins and DO, so that we can better organize the tickets according to dm-core, DO and each dm-more plugin.

    • We should find at least one person to maintain each dm-more plugin and DO driver, so that we can assign tickets to that person for a related issues.

  • Dan Kubb (dkubb)

    Dan Kubb (dkubb) November 30th, 2008 @ 01:40 PM

    Oh, we should also figure out a way to remove some of the less important tags. The tag cloud is so huge it's almost impossible to find anything in it.

  • Dan Kubb (dkubb)

    Dan Kubb (dkubb) November 30th, 2008 @ 04:17 PM

    Jon, do yo think we should adopt some of the naming conventions Merb uses to manage it's project, eg:

    • Unconfirmed (instead of new)
    • Confirmed (instead of open)
    • Assigned (open and assigned to someone actively working on it)
  • Jonathan Stott (namelessjon)

    Jonathan Stott (namelessjon) December 1st, 2008 @ 03:35 AM

    Dan, taking this from the top :)

    First, I'll get a post prepped and sent to the mailing list soon. When we have worked out just how this is supposed to work anyway. It would make a good way for people to start on DM, although there are tickets on there that I have no idea about despite using it for a while. Still, any help in dealing with the ~100 tickets would be appreciated from my end as well as yours I'm sure.

    A new welcome page with guidelines would be good, especially with guidance on what makes a good title, which was something I noticed yesterday. Although I'd settle for a good summary (The first part of a ticket shows up as a 'tool tip'). I think we do need new milestones. Perhaps

    • 0.9.x: Things which need to be resolved before the next gem release
    • 1.0.0: Things that need to be done before we go to 1.0.0
    • 1.x: Things which would be nice to have, but arn't needed for 1.0

    I also think we should start applying supplied patches only when they come with specs (and mention this in the guidelines). Otherwise all the hard work of yourself and others to get dm-core spec'd will slowly ebb away.

    Your workflow for dealing with tickets looks good to me, and was roughly how I was working yesterday. I think dividing up into dm-core, dm-more and do would be sufficient, especially if we can cut the tag cloud down to size. I think adopting some of the merb conventions would be good (especially the Confirmed/Assigned division). Getting maintainers would definitely help, even if only for being people familiar enough with a project to evaluate a ticket or patch properly.

  • Dan Kubb (dkubb)

    Dan Kubb (dkubb) December 4th, 2008 @ 03:57 AM

    • State changed from “open” to “confirmed”
    • Assigned user changed from “Dan Kubb (dkubb)” to “Jonathan Stott (namelessjon)”

    Jon, if it's ok I'm going to assign this to you.

    Can you mark the ticket as "accepted", assuming you'd like to take ownership of this? This is an extra step I'm asking everyone to take, so that we know they are working on something or if it's just in limbo.

  • Jonathan Stott (namelessjon)

    Jonathan Stott (namelessjon) December 4th, 2008 @ 04:14 AM

    • State changed from “confirmed” to “accepted”
  • Piotr Solnica (solnic)

    Piotr Solnica (solnic) March 24th, 2011 @ 07:13 AM

    • State changed from “accepted” to “resolved”
    • Milestone order changed from “0” to “0”

Please Sign in or create a free account to add a new ticket.

With your very own profile, you can contribute to projects, track your activity, watch tickets, receive and update tickets through your email and much more.

New-ticket Create new ticket

Create your profile

Help contribute to this project by taking a few moments to create your personal profile. Create your profile »

Pages