* Bug Squad checklists::
* Issue classification::
* Adding issues to the tracker::
+* Patch handling::
* Summary of project status::
-* Finding the cause of a regression::
@end menu
nothing more than a web browser, email, and lilypond.}
@qq{Issues} isn't just a politically-correct term for @qq{bug}.
-We use the same tracker for feature requests and code TODOs, 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}.
+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}.
The Bug Squad is mainly composed of non-programmers -- their job
is to @emph{organize} issues, not solve them. Their duties
@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.
-
@example
-Sunday: Colin
-Monday: Dmytro
-Tuesday: James Bailey
-Wednesday: Ralph
-Thursday: Patrick
-Friday: Urs
-Saturday: Kieren
+Monday: Ralph
+Tuesday: Eluze
+Wednesday: Brett
+Thursday: Colin Hall (disambiguation here)
+Friday: Marek
+Saturday: Brett
+Sunday: Phil
@end example
@itemize
@item
-Regression test comparison: if anything has changed suspiciously,
-ask if it was deliberate. The official comparison is online, at:
+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:
-@c NOTE: leave this here. In this case, it's worth duplicating
-@c the link. -gp
@example
-@uref{http://lilypond.org/test/}
+@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=7}
@end example
-More information is available from in
-@ref{Precompiled regression tests}.
+You can also generate this list by selecting @qq{Issues to verify}
+from the drop-down list next to the search box.
+Quite a few of these will be issues tracking patches. @strong{You
+do not have to prove these patches work - simply that they have
+been pushed into the code base.} The developer should have put
+information similar to @qq{Pushed as as
+d8fce1e1ea2aca1a82e25e47805aef0f70f511b9} in the tracker. The
+long list of letters and numbers is called the @qq{committish}.
+Providing you can find this at the git tracker:
-@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}).
+@example
+@uref{http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git}
+@end example
+
+then you should mark the issue as verified. A quick way of
+finding these is to enter the committish at the following address:
@example
-@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=7}
+@uref{http://philholmes.net/lilypond/git/}
@end example
-A few (approximately 10%) of these fixed issues relate to the
+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.
-@end itemize
+@item
+Regression test comparison: 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
+from the logfile. This may or may not be suspicious.
+There is one test designed to produce output every time the
+regtests are created. @code{test-output-distance.ly} creates
+randomly spaced notes and will always have different output if the
+regtest checker is working.
-@ignore
-@c try omitting from daily tasks for now. -gp
+The official comparison is online, at:
-Once every @strong{two weeks} or so:
+@c NOTE: leave this here. In this case, it's worth duplicating
+@c the link. -gp
+@example
+@uref{http://lilypond.org/test/}
+@end example
-@itemize
+More information is available from in
+@ref{Precompiled regression tests}.
@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
+a Type.
@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
@section Issue classification
The Bug Squad should classify issues according to the guidelines
-given by developers. Every issue should have a Status, Type, and
-Priority; the other fields are optional.
+given by developers. Every issue should have a Status and Type;
+the other fields are optional.
@subheading Status (mandatory)
@itemize
@item
-Type-Collision: overlapping notation.
+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
+@qq{regression} occurred because a feature was removed
+deliberately - this is not a bug.
+
+Currently, only Critical items will block a stable release.
+
+@item
+Type-Maintainability: hinders future development.
+
+@item
+Type-Crash: any input which produces a crash.
+
+@item
+Type-Ugly: overlapping or other ugly notation in graphical output.
@item
Type-Defect: a problem in the core program. (the @code{lilypond}
@end itemize
-
+@ignore
@subheading Priority (mandatory)
Currently, only Critical items will block a stable release.
@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.
+
+@end ignore
@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, 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 regression.
+
+@item
+If you're not certain either way, add it to the tracker as a
+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
(does not require a great deal of knowledge about LilyPond). The
issue should also have an estimated time in a comment.
-@item
-Maintainability: hinders development of LilyPond. For example,
-improvements to the build system, or @qq{helper} python scripts.
-
@item
Bounty: somebody is willing to pay for the fix. Only add this tag
if somebody has offered an exact figure in US dollars or euros.
documentation.
@item
-Security: might potentially be used.
+Security: security risk.
@item
-Performance: might potentially be used.
+Performance: performance issue.
@end itemize
If you particularly want to add a label not in the list, go
-ahead, but this is not recommended.
+ahead, but this is not recommended, except when an issue is marked
+as fixed. In this case it should be labelled fixed_mm_MM_ss,
+where mm is major version, MM minor version and ss current
+release.
@node Adding issues to the tracker
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:
lilypond --pdf bug.ly
@end example
-Note that this is likely to be extremely rare; most bugs should fit
-into the first two categories above.
+Note that this is likely to be extremely rare; most bugs should
+fit into the first two categories above.
@end itemize
@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.
+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:
+
+@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
@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.
+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
+
+@end ignore
@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
+
+@subsubheading Easy tasks
-Finally, issues tagged with @code{Frog} indicates a task suitable
-for a relatively new contributor. The time given is a quick
+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
+@subsubheading Patches to review
-@node Finding the cause of a regression
-@section Finding the cause of a regression
+Patches which have no @qq{obvious} problems:
-@warning{This is not a @qq{simple} task; it requires a fair amount
-of technical knowledge.}
-
-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}.