Proposed changes to workflow bug management

[Scott Kitterman]

On Monday 26 May 2008 16:40, Michael Bienia wrote:
> On 2008-05-26 15:45:36 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > Development requirements/issues:
> >
> > 1.  Some launchpad changes are likely needed to effect this change.
>
> As we all know changes to LP take some time. What should be done till
> the necessary changes to LP are done?
> The status quo doesn't seem to work anymore :(
>
> > 4.  Need to identify teams that would have access to workflow bugs:
> >
> > Bug filers always have access to a private bug, so those who are not in
> > an appropriate team would still have access to workflow bugs they file.
> >
> > ubuntu-bugcontrol would have access to these bugs (ubuntu-dev is a member
> > of this team, so it gives all developers access).  universe-contributors
> > should also be a member.  One open question is, should there be an open
> > team that has access to these bugs?
>
> What about contributors which aren't universe-contributors yet? They
> won't have access to those bug (unless there is a open team).
> As sponsorship requests are also filed as (workflow) bugs, they should
> have access to them to avoid duplicate work.
>
> I've also a feeling that this proposal will make Ubuntu are little bit
> untransparent. Workflow bugs should be publicly viewable for all interested
> parties as they don't contain any private data.

After thinking about it some more, I think we should have an open team (maybe 
ubuntu-workflow) that anyone can join if interested.

> If the proposal relies on changes to LP what about a special importance
> for workflow bugs? If my memory doesn't fool me importance has not much
> usage in workflow bugs.
> That way those bugs are still public, easy to recognize and can be
> filtered out by the bug triagers using the advanced search.

The problem is that there isn't an existing importance that triagers know not 
to touch.

Scott K