* Bug Squad checklists::
* Issue classification::
* Adding issues to the tracker::
+* Patch handling::
* Summary of project status::
-* Finding the cause of a regression::
@end menu
@enumerate
@item
-Skim through every section of this chapter, @ref{Issues}. Read in
-detail any sections called @qq{Bug Squad...}, or any page linked
-from @ref{Bug Squad checklists}.
+Read every section of this chapter, @ref{Issues}.
@item
If you do not have one already, create a gmail account and send
@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list}
@end example
-You cannot log if you have Google Sharing
-@uref{http://www.googlesharing.net/} enabled.
+You cannot log on if you have Google Sharing enabled
+@uref{http://www.googlesharing.net/}.
@item
Go to your @qq{Profile}, and select @qq{Settings}.
@section 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 15 minutes.
+your way down. Stop when you've done 20 minutes.
Please use the email sorting described in @ref{Bug Squad setup}.
This means that (as Bug Squad members) you will only ever respond
@subsubheading Emails to you personally
You are not expected to work on Bug Squad matters outside of your
-15 minutes, but sometimes a confused user will send a bug report
+20 minutes, but sometimes a confused user will send a bug report
(or an update to a report) to you personally. If that happens,
please forward such emails to the @code{bug-lilypond} list so that
the currently-active Bug Squad member(s) can handle the message.
@subsubheading Daily schedule
-The Bug Meister is omitted from the daily schedule.
+@c spacing is deliberate to help reinforce the "cyclic" nature
@example
-Sunday: Colin
-Monday: Dmytro
-Tuesday: James Bailey
-Wednesday: Ralph
-Thursday: Patrick
-Friday: Urs
-Saturday: Kieren
+Monday: Dmytro
+Tuesday: Colin
+Wednesday: Derek
+Thursday: Dmytro
+Friday: Colin
+Saturday: Derek
+Sunday: Phil
@end example
@item
Issues to verify: try to reproduce the bug with the latest
-version; if you cannot reproduce the bug, mark the item
-@qq{Verified} (i.e. @qq{the fix has been verified to work}).
+official GUB version; if you cannot reproduce the bug, mark the
+item @qq{Verified} (i.e. @qq{the fix has been verified to work}).
@example
@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=7}
for you to verify these. Leave those issues alone; somebody else
will handle them.
-@end itemize
-
-
-@ignore
-@c try omitting from daily tasks for now. -gp
-
-Once every @strong{two weeks} or so:
-
-@itemize
-
@item
Check for any incorrectly-classified items in the tracker. This
generally just means looking at the grid to see any items without
a Type or Priority.
-@item
-Check for any items with @code{label:patch}. If it's been more
-than a week since the last action on the issue, send an email to
--devel to remind them about it. If the patch was withdrawn for
-more work, then remove the @code{patch} label.
-
-@example
-@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=2&q=label:patch}
-@end example
-
@end itemize
+@ignore
+@c try omitting from daily tasks for now. -gp
+
@subheading Irregular maintenance
@warning{These tasks are a lot of work; gathering more volunteers
@itemize
@item
-Priority-Critical: LilyPond segfaults, a regression against a
-previous stable version or a regression against a fix developed
-for this version. This does not apply where the @qq{regression}
-occurred because a feature was removed deliberately - this is not
-a bug.
+Priority-Critical: LilyPond segfaults, a regression (see below)
+against a previous stable version or a regression against a fix
+developed for this version. This does not apply where the
+@qq{regression} occurred because a feature was removed
+deliberately - this is not a bug.
@item
Priority-High: An issue which produces output which does not
@end itemize
+Note that these are initial classifications and can be subject
+to change by others in the development team. For example, a
+regression against an old stable version which hasn't been
+noticed for a long time and which is unlikely to get fixed could
+be downgraded from Priority-Critical by one of the programmers.
@subheading Opsys (optional)
Issues that only affect specific operating systems.
+@subheading Patch (optional)
+
+Normal Bug Squad members should not add or modify Patch issues;
+leave them to the Patch Meister.
+
+@itemize
+
+@item
+Patch-new: the patch has not been checked for @qq{obvious}
+mistakes. When in doubt, use this tag.
+
+@item
+Patch-review: the patch has no @qq{obvious} mistakes (as checked
+by the Patch Meister), and is ready for review from main
+developers.
+
+Developers with git push ability can use this category, skipping
+over @code{patch-new}.
+
+@item
+Patch-needs_work: a developer has some concerns about the patch.
+This does not necessarily mean that the patch must be changed; in
+some cases, the developer's concerns can be resolved simply by
+discussion the situation or providing notation examples.
+
+If the patch is updated, the category should be changed to
+@code{patch-new} (for normal contributors) or @code{patch-review}
+(for developers who are very confident about their patch).
+
+@item
+Patch-abandoned: the author has not responded to review comments
+for a few months.
+
+@end itemize
@subheading Other items (optional)
@itemize
@item
-Regression: it used to @strong{deliberately} work in an earlier
+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.
+To help decide whether the change is a regression, and therefore
+should be Priority-Critical, please adopt the following process:
+
+@enumerate
+
+@item
+Are you certain the change is OK? If so, do nothing.
+
@item
-Patch: a patch to fix an issue is attached.
+Are you certain that the change is bad? Add it to the tracker
+as a Critical issue, regression.
+
+@item
+If you're not certain either way, add it to the tracker as a
+Critical issue, regression but be aware that it may be
+recategorised or marked invalid.
+
+@end enumerate
+
+In particular, anything that breaks a regression test is a
+regression.
@item
Frog: the fix is believed to be suitable for a new contributor
In order to assign labels to issues, Bug Squad members should log
in to their google account before adding an item.
-@subsubheading Normal issues
-
@enumerate
@item
lilypond --png bug.ly
@end example
+@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
+@uref{https://raw.github.com/gperciva/lilypond-extra/master/bug-squad/trimtagline.sh}
+
+@example
+trimtagline.sh bug.ly
+@end example
+
@item
If the issue cannot be shown with less than three pages, then
generate a @file{bug.pdf} file with:
@end enumerate
-@subsubheading Patch reminders
+
+@node Patch handling
+@section Patch handling
@warning{This is not a Bug Squad responsibility; we have a
separate person handling this task.}
-There is a special category of issues: reminders of an existing
-patch. These should be added if a patch has been sent to a
-lilypond mailing list (generally @code{lilypond-devel}, but they
-sometimes appear on @code{bug-lilypond} as well) and has had no
-discussion for at least @strong{3 days}. Do not add issues for
-patches under active discussion.
+There is a single Patch Meister, and a number of Patch Helpers
+(rename this?). The list of known patches awaiting review is:
+
+@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.
+@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
@example
@uref{http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git}
@end example
+@end 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.
+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
+
@node Summary of project status
@section Summary of project status
-The best overview of our current status is given by the grid view:
+@subsubheading Project overview
-@example
+Grid view provides the best overview:
+
+@smallexample
@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?mode=grid&y=Priority&x=Type&cells=ids}
-@end example
+@end smallexample
-Also of interest might be the issues hindering future development:
+@subsubheading Hindering development
-@example
-@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=2&q=label:Maintainability&mode=grid&y=Priority&x=Type&cells=ids}
-@end example
+These issues stop or slow development work:
+
+@smallexample
+@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=2&q=label:Maintainability}
+@end smallexample
-Finally, issues tagged with @code{Frog} indicates a task suitable
-for a relatively new contributor. The time given is a quick
+@subsubheading Easy tasks
+
+Issues tagged with @code{Frog} indicates a task suitable for a
+relatively new contributor. The time given is a quick
(inaccurate) estimate of the time required for somebody who is
familiar with material in this manual, but does not know anything
else about LilyPond development.
-@example
-@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=2&q=label:Frog&mode=grid&y=Priority&x=Type&cells=ids}
-@end example
-
+@smallexample
+@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=2&q=label:Frog}
+@end smallexample
-@node Finding the cause of a regression
-@section Finding the cause of a regression
+@subsubheading Patches to review
-@warning{This is not a @qq{simple} task; it requires a fair amount
-of technical knowledge.}
+Patches which have no @qq{obvious} problems:
-Git has special functionality to help tracking down the exact
-commit which causes a problem. See the git manual page for
-@code{git bisect}. This is a job that non-programmers can do,
-although it requires familiarity with git, ability to compile
-LilyPond, and generally a fair amount of technical knowledge. An
-in-depth explanation of this process will not be given here.
-
-Even if you are not familiar with git or are not able to compile
-LilyPond you can still help to narrow down the cause of a
-regression simply by downloading the binary releases of different
-LilyPond versions and testing them for the regression. Knowing
-which version of LilyPond first exhibited the regression is
-helpful to a developer as it shortens the @code{git bisect}
-procedure described above.
+@example
+@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=2&q=label:patch-review}
+@end example
-Once a problematic commit is identified, the programmers' job is
-much easier. In fact, for most regression bugs, the majority of
-the time is spent simply finding the problematic commit.
-More information is in @ref{Regression tests}.