@menu
* Introduction to issues::
+* Bug Squad overview::
* Bug Squad setup::
* Bug Squad checklists::
* Issue classification::
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
New volunteers for the Bug Squad should contact the
@ref{Meisters, Bug Meister}.
+@node Bug Squad overview
+@section Bug Squad overview
+
+The Bug Squad are volunteers who progress issue tracking using the
+Google Issue tracker at
+
+@example
+@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list}
+@end example
+
+Bug Squad members have 2 primary responsiblities:
+
+@enumerate
+
+@item
+Monitoring the LilyPond Bugs mailing list and adding to the
+tracker any new issues reported there.
+
+@item
+Verifying issues that are claimed fixed by a developer, to ensure
+that the fix works, and is actually in the code base.
+
+@end enumerate
+
+It's also part of the Bug Squad's responsibility to check that
+the Regression Tests don't show up any problems in the latest
+release. The Bug Meister currently does this.
+
+All of this is explained in more detail in the following sections.
@node Bug Squad setup
@section Bug Squad setup
@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: Eluze
+Tuesday:
+Wednesday: Marek Klein
+Thursday: Eluze
+Friday:
+Saturday: Colin Campbell
+Sunday:
@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: go to
-@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.)
+
+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
+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:
+@example
+@uref{http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git}
+@end example
-@item
-Issues to verify: try to reproduce the bug with the latest
-official GUB version; if you cannot reproduce the bug, mark the
-item @qq{Verified} (i.e. @qq{the fix has been verified to work}).
+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
+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
+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
+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.
+
+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.
+a Type.
@end itemize
@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 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.
+
+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}
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.
@end itemize
-
+@ignore
@subheading Priority (mandatory)
Currently, only Critical items will block a stable release.
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)
+@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
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-new}
+@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, and therefore
-should be Priority-Critical, please adopt the following process:
+To help decide whether the change is a regression, please adopt
+the following process:
@enumerate
@item
Are you certain that the change is bad? Add it to the tracker
-as a Critical issue, regression.
+as a 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.
+regression but be aware that it may be recategorised or marked
+invalid.
@end enumerate
(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 labeled Fixed_mm_MM_ss,
+where mm is major version, MM minor version and ss current
+release.
@node Adding issues to the tracker
@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:
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
+
+@smallexample
+@uref{https://raw.github.com/gperciva/lilypond-extra/master/bug-squad/trimtagline.sh}
+@end smallexample
+
+@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
@warning{This is not a Bug Squad responsibility; we have a
separate person handling this task.}
+For contributors/developers: follow the steps in
+@ref{Commits and patches}, and @ref{Pushing to staging}.
+
+@ignore
+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.
+@end ignore
+
+@subheading Patch cycle
+
+@itemize
+
+@item
+Patches get added to the tracker and to Rietveld by the @qq{git-cl} tool, with
+a status of @qq{patch-new}.
+
+@item
+The automated tester, Patchy, verifies that the patch can be applied
+to current master. By default, it checks that the patch allows @code{make}
+and @code{make test} to complete successfully. It can also be configured to
+check that @code{make doc} is successful. If it passes, Patchy changes the
+status to @qq{patch-review} and emails the developer list. If the patch
+fails, Patchy sets it to @qq{patch-needs_work} and notifies the developer list.
+
+@item
+The Patch Meister reviews the tracker periodically, to list patches
+which have been on review for at least 24 hours. The list is found at
+
+@smallexample
+@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=2&q=label:patch%20patch=review&sort=modified+patch&colspec=ID%20Type%20Status%20Priority%20Owner%20Patch%20Summary%20Modified}
+@end smallexample
+
+@item
+For each patch, the Handler reviews any discussion on the tracker
+and on Rietveld, to determine whether the patch can go forward. If
+there is any indication that a developer thinks the patch is not
+ready, the Handler marks it @qq{patch-needs_work} and makes a comment
+regarding the reason, referring to the Rietveld item if needed.
+
+@item
+Patches with explicit approval, or at least no negative comment, can
+be updated to @qq{patch-countdown}. When saving the tracker item,
+clear the @qq{send email} box to prevent sending notification for
+each patch.
+
+@item
+The Patch Meister sends an email to the developer list, with a fixed
+subject line, to enable filtering by email clients:
+
+@example
+PATCH: Countdown to 20130113
+@end example
+
+The text of the email sets the deadline for this countdown batch. At
+present, batches are done on Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday evenings.
+
+To create the countdown announcement, use the
+@code{make-countdown-announcement.sh} script, which takes the
+deadline date, and optionally your name. Follow the instructions
+provided:
+
+@example
+cd $LILYPOND_GIT
+scripts/auxiliar/make-countdown-announcement.sh "Jan 1, 2001" James
+@end example
+
+The script produces an announcement that is easily readable in all
+email clients. Also, whenever a new contributor submits a patch,
+you will be prompted to add the new username and author name to
+the script itself, and then commit those changes to the main git
+repository.
+
+
+@item
+On the scheduled countdown day, the Patch Meister reviews the
+previous list of patches on countdown, with the same procedure and
+criteria as before. Patches with no controversy can be set to
+@qq{patch-push} with a courtesy message added to the comment block.
+
+@item
+Roughly at six month intervals, the Patch Meister can list the
+patches which have been set to @qq{patch-needs-work} and send the
+results to the developer list for review. In most cases, these
+patches should be marked @qq{patch-abandoned} but this should come
+from the developer if possible.
+
+@item
+As in most organisations of unpaid volunteers, fixed procedures are
+useful in as much as they get the job done. In our community, there
+is room for senior developers to bypass normal patch handling flows,
+particularly now that the testing of patches is largely automated.
+Similarly, the minimum age of 24 hours can reasonably be waived if
+the patch is minor and from an experienced developer.
+
+
+@end itemize
+
+@ignore
There is a single Patch Meister, and a number of Patch Helpers
(rename this?). The list of known patches awaiting review is:
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
@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
@end itemize
-
+@end ignore
@node Summary of project status
Grid view provides the best overview:
-@example
+@smallexample
@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?mode=grid&y=Priority&x=Type&cells=ids}
-@end example
+@end smallexample
@subsubheading Hindering development
These issues stop or slow development work:
-@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
+@smallexample
+@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=2&q=label:Maintainability}
+@end smallexample
@subsubheading Easy tasks
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
projects / lilypond.git / blobdiff