DMB: Proposal for a different review process

[Brad Figg]

On 08/02/2011 01:38 PM, Chase Douglas wrote:
> On 08/02/2011 01:26 PM, Brad Figg wrote:
>> On 08/02/2011 01:12 PM, Dan Chen wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 16:04, Chase Douglas<chase.douglas at canonical.com>   wrote:
>>>> True, but progress sometimes means change. I think this system would
>>>> work better, and if proven right it could be a model for other boards to
>>>> adopt. If it's worse, then the DMB can easily switch back. I would also
>>>> be happy to be a guinea pig for any process changes.
>>>
>>> I echo Chase's opinion in this regard; we should remain flexible in
>>> adapting our approval processes.
>>>
>>> The only thing I add is that we should be cognizant of building a
>>> timeout into the process using Launchpad so that applications don't
>>> "spin indefinitely," e.g., "the stale five-digit Launchpad bug
>>> report."
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Dan
>>>
>>
>> You could use the model the kernel team is using for tracking workflow for
>> SRU kernels. We have a project set up and a set of custom series that are
>> used for tracking the workflow. A "bot" runs at regular intervals sending
>> out nags if necessary or changing the status of a workflow item as previous
>> dependencies are met.
>
> That's interesting. How are custom bug series managed? I admin a few
> projects on LP, but I can't find any way of doing this.
>
> -- Chase

You can just make up your own names. If you go to: https://launchpad.net/kernel-sru-workflow
you can see them all. You just "Register a series" to add another. Note, when listed on a
bug report as a task, the tasks are listed alphabetically.

Brad
-- 
Brad Figg brad.figg at canonical.com http://www.canonical.com