UDS Prep: Making it easier to fix bugs

[Vishnoo]

On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 11:50 +0200, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> Am 15.10.2010 19:15, schrieb Emmet Hikory:
> 
> >     A lot of this process grew because we had one or another issue
> > that ended up causing us to add something.  Some of it comes from an
> > attempt to preserve choice (either by us, or inherited from Debian).
> > I think we'd do best to avoid attempting to develop a
> > one-size-fits-all *the way* for new folk to get stuff done.  Instead,
> > I think we'd do better to enage in two parallel paths:
> > 
> > A) Break down the process of finding a bug to having the fix as far
> > upstream as makes sense into lots of little steps, and encourage
> > newcomers to pick some step and repeat it for N bugs.  This makes the
> > barrier to entry for any of the steps fairly low, and lets someone
> > contribute effectively quickly.  It also fosters communication and
> > coordination within the community as people hand off things from one
> > stage to the next.
> > 
> >     Note that nothing here would involve any of the messiness of
> > dealing with Ubuntu packaging, Ubuntu conventions, release-stage
> > considreations, multiple parallel review processes, etc.  Just find
> > bugs, identify the responsible bit, track down fixes, test them (local
> > direct conventionless builds are probably fine), and get them
> > upstream.  While nothing here directly appears to affect Ubuntu, every
> > bugfix patch that gets upstream improves Ubuntu in the long term, and
> > it often is not hard to cherrypick such patches if there is some
> > special need to have them in Ubuntu sooner, or as an SRU.
> 
> Do you envision something like the process of the Patch Reviewers team
> to do this? So tags (and/or fixed-elsewhere statuses) would show things
> that can be "picked from upstream"?
> 
> 	https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ReviewersTeam/ReviewGuide
> 

If we are adding more tags, I'd like to see a 'patch-needsdesign' tag in
the workflow. 
Eg:
<https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-center/+bug/433838>

There are several bugs which have patches but are design changes and are
left alone... 
It was suggested to use the 'patch-needswork' tag instead.
But, in such bugs, the patch does *not* need work, it just needs design
review/approval. 
I'v been asking about this for a *very* long time, but seems to not be
included yet into the review workflow. :-)  
Since it has not yet been included in the workflow and no one else is
tagging those bugs right.

Btw, Lp already allows us to see the fixed upstream bugs : 
<https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/packagename/+bugs?field.status_upstream=resolved_upstream>

Do we really need more tags? IMO, we can do away with a few of the
existing tags, I dont see the point of several of the existing tags.

-- 
Cheers,
Vish