-@c -*- coding: utf-8; mode: texinfo; -*-
+Elu@c -*- coding: utf-8; mode: texinfo; -*-
@node Issues
@chapter Issues
@menu
* Introduction to issues::
-* Bug Squad setup::
-* Bug Squad checklists::
+* The Bug Squad::
* Issue classification::
* Adding issues to the tracker::
* Patch handling::
@node Introduction to issues
@section Introduction to issues
-@warning{Unless otherwise specified, all the tasks in this chapter
-are @qq{simple} tasks: they can be done by a normal user with
-nothing more than a web browser, email, and lilypond.}
+@warning{All the tasks in this chapter require no programming skills and
+can be done by anyone with a web browser, an email client and the
+ability to run LilyPond.}
+
+The term @q{issues} refers not just to software bugs but also includes
+feature requests, documentation additions and corrections as well as any
+other general code @q{TODOs} that need to be kept track of.
+
+
+@node The Bug Squad
+@section The Bug Squad
+
+@menu
+* Bug Squad setup::
+* Bug Squad checklists::
+@end menu
+
+To help keep track and organize all issues are a group of tireless
+volunteers collectively known as the @emph{Bug Squad}. Composed mainly
+of non-programmers, the Bug Squad's responsibilities include:
+
+@itemize
-@qq{Issues} isn't just a politically-correct term for @qq{bug}.
-We use the same tracker for feature requests, code TODOs and
-patches, so the term @qq{bug} wouldn't be accurate. Despite the
-difference between @qq{issue} and @qq{bug}, we call our team of
-contributors who organize issues the @emph{Bug Squad}.
+@item
+Monitoring the LilyPond Bugs mailing list looking for any issues
+reported by other users ensuring that they are accurate and contain
+enough information for the developers to work with, preferably with
+@rweb{Tiny examples} and if applicable, screenshots.
-The Bug Squad is mainly composed of non-programmers -- their job
-is to @emph{organize} issues, not solve them. Their duties
-include removing false bug reports, ensuring that any real bug
-report contains enough information for developers, and checking
-that a developer's fix actually resolves the problem.
+@item
+Adding new issues to the @emph{issue tracker} or updating existing
+issues with new information.
-New volunteers for the Bug Squad should contact the
+@item
+Verifying issues in the @emph{issue tracker} that have been marked
+as @q{fixed}; making sure either that the fix works or (in the case of
+Documentation for example) has at least been commited to the code base.
+
+@end itemize
+
+The @ref{Meisters, Bug Meister} also helps check the current
+@ref{Regression tests} and highlights any significant changes (or
+problems) since the previous LilyPond release.
+
+If you would like to be part of the Bug Squad, please contact the
@ref{Meisters, Bug Meister}.
@node Bug Squad setup
-@section Bug Squad setup
+@subsection Bug Squad setup
We highly recommend that you configure your email to use effective
sorting; this can reduce your workload @emph{immensely}. The
@node Bug Squad checklists
-@section Bug Squad checklists
+@subsection Bug Squad checklists
When you do Bug Squad work, start at the top of this page and work
your way down. Stop when you've done 20 minutes.
the currently-active Bug Squad member(s) can handle the message.
-@subsubheading Daily schedule
+@subsubheading Daily schedule as of July 2015
@example
-Monday: Ralph
-Tuesday: Eluze
-Wednesday: Brett
-Thursday: Colin Hall (disambiguation here)
-Friday: Marek
-Saturday: Brett
-Sunday: Phil
+Monday: Federico Bruni
+Tuesday: Simon Albrecht
+Wednesday: Simon Albrecht
+Thursday: Colin Campbell
+Friday:
+Saturday: Colin Campbell
+Sunday:
@end example
@itemize
@item
-Issues to verify: try to reproduce the bug with the latest
-officially released version (not one you've built yourself from
-source); if the bug is no longer there, mark the
-issue @qq{Verified} (i.e. @qq{the fix has been verified to work}).
-
-The list of items to verify is here:
+Issues to verify: go to
@example
@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=7}
@end example
-You can also generate this list by selecting @qq{Issues to verify}
-from the drop-down list next to the search box.
+(You can also generate this list by selecting
+@qq{Issues to verify} from the drop-down list next to the search
+box.)
+
+You should see a list of Issues that have been claimed fixed by a
+developer. If the developer has done their job properly, the
+Issue should have a tag @qq{Fixed_mm_MM_ss}, where mm is
+the major version, MM the minor version and ss the current
+release. This will help you work out which you can verify - do
+not verify any Issues where the claimed fixed build is not yet
+released. Work your way through these as follows:
+
+If the Issue refers to a bug, try to reproduce the bug with the latest
+officially released version (not one you've built yourself from
+source); if the bug is no longer there, mark the
+issue @qq{Verified} (i.e. @qq{the fix has been verified to work}).
Quite a few of these will be issues tracking patches. @strong{You
do not have to prove these patches work - simply that they have
@uref{http://philholmes.net/lilypond/git/}
@end example
+The Issue tracker also requires that any issues labelled as
+@qq{Duplicate} are also verified. Check that the linked issue is
+a duplicate and verify the issue.
+
A few (approximately 10%) of the fixed issues relate to the
build system or fundamental architecture changes; there is no way
for you to verify these. Leave those issues alone; somebody else
will handle them.
@item
-Regression test comparison: if anything has changed suspiciously,
+The official regression test comparison is online at:
+
+@c NOTE: leave this here. In this case, it's worth duplicating
+@c the link. -gp
+@example
+@uref{http://lilypond.org/test/}
+@end example
+
+If anything has changed suspiciously,
ask if it was deliberate. If the text output from LilyPond (the
logfile) changes, the differences will be displayed with a +
before text added to the logfile and - before any text removed
randomly spaced notes and will always have different output if the
regtest checker is working.
-The official comparison is online, at:
-
-@c NOTE: leave this here. In this case, it's worth duplicating
-@c the link. -gp
-@example
-@uref{http://lilypond.org/test/}
-@end example
-
More information is available from in
@ref{Precompiled regression tests}.
@item
Type-Critical: normally a regression
-against a previous stable version or a regression against a fix
-developed for this version. This does not apply where the
+against the current stable version or the previous stable version.
+Alternatively, a regression against a fix developed for the
+current version. This does not apply where the
@qq{regression} occurred because a feature was removed
deliberately - this is not a bug.
distinction between enhancement and defect isn't extremely clear;
when in doubt, mark it as enhancement.
+@item
+Type-Patch: tracking a patch on Rietveld. Bug squad should not
+need to use this label.
+
@item
Type-Other: anything else.
Issues that only affect specific operating systems.
-@subheading Patch (optional)
+@subheading Patch label (optional)
-Normal Bug Squad members should not add or modify Patch issues;
-leave them to the Patch Meister.
+Normal Bug Squad members should not add or modify Patch issues
+except to verify them; for all other Patch work, leave them to the
+Patch Meister.
@itemize
@code{patch-new} (for normal contributors) or @code{patch-review}
(for developers who are very confident about their patch).
+@item
+Patch-countdown: final call for any patch problems
+
+@item
+Patch-push: patch has passed the countdown and should be pushed.
+
@item
Patch-abandoned: the author has not responded to review comments
for a few months.
@itemize
@item
-Regression: it used to work intentionally in an earlier
-stable release. If the earlier output was accidental (i.e. we
-didn't try to stop a collision, but it just so happened that two
-grobs didn't collide), then breaking it does not count as a
-regression.
+Regression: it used to work intentionally in the current
+stable release or the previous stable release. If the earlier
+output was accidental (i.e. we didn't try to stop a collision,
+but it just so happened that two grobs didn't collide), then
+breaking it does not count as a regression.
To help decide whether the change is a regression, please adopt
the following process:
If you particularly want to add a label not in the list, go
ahead, but this is not recommended, except when an issue is marked
-as fixed. In this case it should be labeled fixed_mm_MM_ss,
+as fixed. In this case it should be labeled Fixed_mm_MM_ss,
where mm is major version, MM minor version and ss current
release.
@item
Add the issue and classify it according to the guidelines in
@ref{Issue classification}. In particular, the item should have
-@code{Status}, @code{Type-}, and @code{Priority-} labels.
+@code{Status} and @code{Type-} labels.
Include output with the first applicable method:
@item
Images created as @file{bug.png} may be trimmed to a minimum size
by using the @code{trimtagline.sh} script, which can be found at
+
+@smallexample
@uref{https://raw.github.com/gperciva/lilypond-extra/master/bug-squad/trimtagline.sh}
+@end smallexample
@example
trimtagline.sh bug.ly
@end enumerate
-
@node Patch handling
@section Patch handling
separate person handling this task.}
For contributors/developers: follow the steps in
-@ref{Commits and patches}, and @ref{Pushing to staging}.
-
-For people doing maintenance tasks: git-cl is adding issues, James
-is testing them, Colin is selecting them for countdowns, and
-Patchy is merging from staging to master. In the coming weeks,
-these tasks will be more and more automated.
-
-@ignore
-There is a single Patch Meister, and a number of Patch Helpers
-(rename this?). The list of known patches awaiting review is:
+@ref{Patches}, and @ref{Pushing to staging}.
-@example
-@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=2&q=label:patch&sort=patch}
-@end example
-
-
-@subheading Helpers: adding patches
-
-The primary duty is to add patches to the google tracker; we have
-a bad track record of losing patches in email. Patches generally
-come to the @code{lilypond-devel} mailing list, but are sometimes
-sent to @code{bug-lilypond}, @code{lilypond-users}, or
-@code{frogs} mailing list instead.
-
-@itemize
-@item
-Unless a patch is clearly in response to an existing issue, add a
-new issue with the @code{Patch-new} label and a link to the patch
-(either on the mailing list archives or the codereview url).
-
-Issue numbers are cheap; losing developers because they got fed up
-with us losing their hard work is expensive.
-
-@end ignore
-@c if we enter patches immediately, I don't think this is relevant.
@ignore
-@item
-Before adding a patch-reminder issue, do a quick check to see if
-it was pushed without sending any email. This can be checked for
-searching for relevant terms (from the patch subject or commit
-message) on the webgit page:
-
-@example
-@uref{http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git}
-@end example
-@end ignore
-@ignore
-
-@item
-If the patch is clearly in response to an existing issue, then
-update that issue with the @code{Patch-new} label and a link to
-the patch (either on the mailing list archives or the codereview
-url).
-
-@item
-After adding the issue, please send a response email to the same
-group(s) that the initial patch was sent to.
-
-If the initial email was sent to multiple mailing lists (such as
-both @code{bugs} and @code{devel}), then reply to all those
-mailing lists as well. The email should contain a link to the
-issue you just added.
-
-@end itemize
-
-@subheading Helpers: @code{Patch-review} label
-
-The secondary duty is to do make sure that every issue in the
-tracker with a @code{Patch-review} label has passed these
-@qq{obvious} tests:
-
-@itemize
-@item
-Applies automatically to git master.
-
-It's ok to have offsets, but not conflicts.
-
-@item
-Regtest comparison looks ok; no unexpected changes.
-
-@item
-Descriptive subject line.
-
-Avoid subjects like @qq{fixes 123}; instead write @qq{Doc: discuss
-stacking-dir for BassFigureAlignment (fix 123)}.
-
-@item
-Compiles docs from scratch. Only check this if you have reason to
-suspect it might not work.
-
-@item
-(maybe)
-
-Check code indentation and style. This should be easier post-GOP
-when we have a better-defined code style.
-
-@end itemize
-
-
-@subheading Patch Meister
-
-The Patch Meister will:
-
-@itemize
-
-@item
-send @qq{countdown} emails to
-@code{lilypond-devel} when patches appear to be ready.
-
-@item
-send general requests to review patches, or even nasty requests to
-review patches.
-
-@item
-downgrade patches from @code{Patch-review} to
-@code{Patch-needs_work} as appropriate.
-
-@item
-downgrade patches from @code{Patch-needs_work} to
-@code{Patch-abandoned} if no actions have been taken in four
-weeks.
-
-@end itemize
-
+For people doing maintenance tasks: git-cl is adding issues, James
+is testing patches and managing the Patch countdown. He also generally
+runs the scripts that merging to Staging (although other developers are
+available to do this task if required).
@end ignore
projects / lilypond.git / blobdiff