boilerplate messages in bugs

[Leann Ogasawara]

On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 17:41 +0930, Karl Goetz wrote:
> hi bug people,

Hi Karl,

> I'm writing [1] about an experiance I've just had with a 'boilerplate
> paster' and a number of bug reports i was subscribed too. ( [2,3,4,5],
> all are filed againt the kernel package. )

Thanks for sending this to the list.  I was responsible for sending out
the 2.6.27 call for testing on behalf of the kernel team so I'll try to
respond as best I can.  The kernel team collectively decided to *try*
moving to the 2.6.27 kernel based on the fact that the 2.6.26 kernel was
going to be inadequate for the Intrepid Ibex 8.10 release [A].  A final
decision to stick with the 2.6.27 kernel will be made this week.  A
major factor preventing the transition to the 2.6.27 kernel would be any
showstopping regressions or critical bugs caused by the 2.6.27 kernel.
For this reason, the kernel team needed as much feedback regarding the
2.6.27 kernel as quickly as possible.  This is the reason the call for
testing was sent out to all open kernel bug reports.  Given the volume
of open kernel bugs [B], it would have been inefficient to manually read
through each kernel bug report and post the call for testing.  It was
bound to happen that the automated response would not read well with
every bug report, so for that I apologize.  However, sending out the
automated call for testing was a necessary action given the time
constraint the kernel team has for making a decision regarding 2.6.27.

> These all had the same message pasted into them [6], which on the
> surface is fair enough, but the bit that made this seem somewhat
> wasteful and gratuitious, was bug 218616 :
>  This bug refers to a source file, the paste told me to download and
> test the latest intrepid kernel kernel.
> 
> This isnt the first time i've seen bugs with boilerplate messages pasted
> into them (i dont have any handy though sorry).
> I'm wondering if theres something that can be done to reduce the amount
> of 'senseless' pasting of boilerplates - where its relevent (eg, does
> this modem work?) i think its acceptable.

You do raise a good point here.  It's difficult to distinguish which bug
reports should and should not receive these automated replies.  I wonder
if we should create a new tag in Launchpad which reporters could use to
indicate they do not want to receive any such responses.  Thoughts?

Thanks,
Leann

[A] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2008-August/026142.html
[B] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bugs

> [1] Was advised on IRC to post to this list about it.
> [2] https://launchpad.net/bugs/223175
> [3] https://launchpad.net/bugs/218616
> [4] https://launchpad.net/bugs/76347
> [5] https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/100031
> [6] 
> The Ubuntu Kernel Team is planning to move to the 2.6.27 kernel for the
> upcoming Intrepid Ibex 8.10 release. As a result, the kernel team would
> appreciate it if you could please test this newer 2.6.27 Ubuntu kernel.
> There are one of two ways you should be able to test:
> 
> 1) If you are comfortable installing packages on your own, the
> linux-image-2.6.27-* package is currently available for you to install
> and test.
> 
> --or--
> 
> 2) The upcoming Alpha5 for Intrepid Ibex 8.10 will contain this newer
> 2.6.27 Ubuntu kernel. Alpha5 is set to be released Thursday Sept 4.
> Please watch http://www.ubuntu.com/testing for Alpha5 to be announced.
> You should then be able to test via a LiveCD.
> 
> Please let us know immediately if this newer 2.6.27 kernel resolves the
> bug reported here or if the issue remains. More importantly, please open
> a new bug report for each new bug/regression introduced by the 2.6.27
> kernel and tag the bug report with 'linux-2.6.27'. Also, please
> specifically note if the issue does or does not appear in the 2.6.26
> kernel. Thanks again, we really appreicate your help and feedback.
>