--- /dev/null
+@c -*- coding: utf-8; mode: texinfo; -*-
+@node Issues
+@chapter Issues
+
+This chapter deals with defects, feature requests, and
+miscellaneous development tasks.
+
+@menu
+* Introduction to issues::
+* Bug Squad setup::
+* Bug Squad checklists::
+* Issue classification::
+* Adding issues to the tracker::
+* Patch handling::
+* Summary of project status::
+@end menu
+
+
+@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.}
+
+@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}.
+
+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.
+
+New volunteers for the Bug Squad should contact the
+@ref{Meisters, Bug Meister}.
+
+
+@node Bug Squad setup
+@section Bug Squad setup
+
+We highly recommend that you configure your email to use effective
+sorting; this can reduce your workload @emph{immensely}. The
+email folders names were chosen specifically to make them work if
+you sort your folders alphabetically.
+
+@enumerate
+
+@item
+Read every section of this chapter, @ref{Issues}.
+
+@item
+If you do not have one already, create a gmail account and send
+the email address to the @ref{Meisters, Bug Meister}.
+
+@item
+Subscribe your gmail account to @code{bug-lilypond}.
+
+@item
+Configure your google code account:
+
+@enumerate
+
+@item
+Wait until your gmail account is listed in:
+
+@example
+@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/people/list}
+@end example
+
+@item
+Sign in to google code by clicking in the top-right corner of:
+
+@example
+@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.
+
+@item
+Go to your @qq{Profile}, and select @qq{Settings}.
+
+@item
+Scroll down to @qq{Issue change notification}, and make sure that
+you have @emph{selected} @qq{If I starred the issue}.
+
+@end enumerate
+
+@item
+Configure your email client:
+
+@enumerate
+
+@item
+Any email sent with your gmail address in the @code{To:} or
+@code{CC:} fields should go to a @code{bug-answers} folder.
+
+When setting up your filtering rules, be aware that Google Code
+might use different versions of your email address, such as ones
+ending in @code{@@googlemail.com} or @code{@@gmail.com}.
+
+@item
+Any other email either from, or CC'd to,
+
+@example
+lilypond@@googlecode.com
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+should go into a separate @code{bug-ignore} folder. Alternately,
+you may automatically delete these emails.
+
+You will @strong{not read} these emails as part of your Bug Squad
+duties. If you are curious, go ahead and read them later, but it
+does @strong{not} count as Bug Squad work.
+
+@item
+Any other email sent to (or CC'd to):
+
+@example
+bug-lilypond
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+should go into a separate @code{bug-current} folder.
+
+@end enumerate
+
+@end enumerate
+
+
+@node Bug Squad checklists
+@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.
+
+Please use the email sorting described in @ref{Bug Squad setup}.
+This means that (as Bug Squad members) you will only ever respond
+to emails sent or CC'd to the @code{bug-lilypond} mailing list.
+
+
+@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
+(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
+@end example
+
+
+@subsubheading Emails to @code{bug-answers}
+
+Some of these emails will be comments on issues that you added to
+the tracker.
+
+@itemize
+If they are asking for more information, give the additional
+information.
+
+@item
+If the email says that the issue was classified in some other
+manner, read the rationale given and take that into account for
+the next issue you add.
+
+@item
+Otherwise, move them to your @code{bug-ignore} folder.
+
+@end itemize
+
+Some of these emails will be discussions about Bug Squad work;
+read those.
+
+
+@subsubheading Emails to @code{bug-current}
+
+Dealing with these emails is your main task. Your job is to get
+rid of these emails in the first method which is applicable:
+
+@enumerate
+@item
+If the email has already been handled by a Bug Squad member (i.e.
+check to see who else has replied to it), delete it.
+
+@item
+If the email is a question about how to use LilyPond, reply with
+this response:
+
+@example
+For questions about how to use LilyPond, please read our
+documentation available from:
+ @uref{http://lilypond.org/website/manuals.html}
+or ask the lilypond-user mailing list.
+@end example
+
+@item
+If the email mentions @qq{the latest git}, or any version number
+that has not yet been officially released, forward it to
+@code{lilypond-devel}.
+
+@item
+If a bug report is not in the form of a Tiny example, direct the
+user to resubmit the report with this response:
+
+@example
+I'm sorry, but due to our limited resources for handling bugs, we
+can only accept reports in the form of Tiny examples. Please see
+step 2 in our bug reporting guidelines:
+ @uref{http://lilypond.org/website/bug-reports.html}
+@end example
+
+@item
+If anything is unclear, ask the user for more information.
+
+How does the graphical output differ from what the user expected?
+What version of lilypond was used (if not given) and operating
+system (if this is a suspected cause of the problem)? In short,
+if you cannot understand what the problem is, ask the user to
+explain more. It is the user's responsibility to explain the
+problem, not your responsibility to understand it.
+
+@item
+If the behavior is expected, the user should be told to read the
+documentation:
+
+@example
+I believe that this is the expected behaviour -- please read our
+documentation about this topic. If you think that it really is a
+mistake, please explain in more detail. If you think that the
+docs are unclear, please suggest an improvement as described by
+@qq{Simple tasks -- Documentation} on:
+ @uref{http://lilypond.org/website/help-us.html}
+@end example
+
+@item
+If the issue already exists in the tracker, send an email to that
+effect:
+
+@example
+This issue has already been reported; you can follow the
+discussion and be notified about fixes here:
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+(copy+paste the google code issue URL)
+
+@item
+Accept the report as described in
+@ref{Adding issues to the tracker}.
+
+@end enumerate
+
+All emails should be CC'd to the @code{bug-lilypond} list so that
+other Bug Squad members know that you have processed the email.
+
+@warning{There is no option for @qq{ignore the bug report} -- if
+you cannot find a reason to reject the report, you must accept
+it.}
+
+
+@ignore
+@c Try omitting this from Bug Squad duties
+
+@subheading Updates / discussion about issues
+
+We try to keep discussions about issues on the tracker, but
+sometimes it spills over onto email. If discussion has ended with
+no patch / resolution and at least @strong{3 days} have passed,
+then either:
+
+@itemize
+
+@item
+Summarize the recent discussion on the tracker, and add a link to
+the original discussion.
+
+@item
+Add the comment @qq{there was some technical discussion which I
+could not understand}, and include a link to the original
+discussion.
+
+We do not expect Bug Squad members to be programmers, or even to
+be moderately-skilled users. Your job is to keep track of issue
+reports; it is @emph{perfectly acceptable} to not understand
+discussions between advanced users and/or developers.
+
+@end itemize
+@end ignore
+
+
+@subheading Regular maintenance
+
+After @strong{every release} (both stable and unstable):
+
+@itemize
+
+@item
+Regression test comparison: if anything has changed suspiciously,
+ask if it was deliberate. 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
+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}).
+
+@example
+@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=7}
+@end example
+
+A few (approximately 10%) of these 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
+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.
+
+@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
+to help is definitely recommended. However, the Bug Squad should
+handle the organization and training of new volunteers.}
+
+Once every year or two:
+
+@itemize
+
+@item
+Checking all regtests: although we have a system for checking the
+regtests between two versions, occasionally a bug will slip
+through the cracks. It is therefore good to manually examine all
+the regtests (compare the images to the text description). More
+information is available from in @ref{Regression tests}.
+
+
+@item
+Checking all issues: we try to mark each Issue @q{fixed} when we
+fix it, but occasionally one or two issues will slip through the
+cracks. It is therefore good to check all Issues. If you see the
+same (broken) output as the initial report, then simply post a
+@qq{Problem still exists in 2.x.y} message to the issue.
+
+@end itemize
+
+@end ignore
+
+
+@node Issue classification
+@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.
+
+@subheading Status (mandatory)
+
+Open issues:
+
+@itemize
+
+@item
+New: the item was added by a non-member, despite numerous warnings
+not to do this. Should be reviewed by a member of the Bug Squad.
+
+@item
+Accepted: the Bug Squad added it, or reviewed the item.
+
+@item
+Started: a contributor is working on a fix. Owner should change
+to be this contributor.
+
+@end itemize
+
+
+Closed issues:
+
+@itemize
+
+@item
+Invalid: issue should not have been added in the current state.
+
+@item
+Duplicate: issue already exists in the tracker.
+
+@item
+Fixed: a contributor claims to have fixed the bug. The Bug
+Squad should check the fix with the next official binary release
+(not by compiling the source from git). Owner should be set to
+that contributor.
+
+@item
+Verified: Bug Squad has confirmed that the issue is closed. This
+means that nobody should ever need look at the report again -- if
+there is any information in the issue that should be kept, open a
+new issue for that info.
+
+@end itemize
+
+
+@subheading Owner (optional)
+
+Newly-added issues should have @emph{no owner}. When a
+contributor indicates that he has Started or Fixed an item, he
+should become the owner.
+
+
+@subheading Type (mandatory)
+
+The issue's Type should be the first relevant item in this list.
+
+@itemize
+
+@item
+Type-Collision: overlapping notation.
+
+@item
+Type-Defect: a problem in the core program. (the @code{lilypond}
+binary, scm files, fonts, etc).
+
+@item
+Type-Documentation: inaccurate, missing, confusing, or desired
+additional info. Must be fixable by editing a texinfo, ly, or scm
+file.
+
+@item
+Type-Build: problem or desired features in the build system. This
+includes the makefiles, stepmake, python scripts, and GUB.
+
+@item
+Type-Scripts: problem or desired feature in the non-build-system
+scripts. Mostly used for convert-ly, lilypond-book, etc.
+
+@item
+Type-Enhancement: a feature request for the core program. The
+distinction between enhancement and defect isn't extremely clear;
+when in doubt, mark it as enhancement.
+
+@item
+Type-Other: anything else.
+
+@end itemize
+
+
+@subheading Priority (mandatory)
+
+Currently, only Critical items will block a stable release.
+
+@itemize
+
+@item
+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
+accurately reflect the input (e.g. where the user would expect
+an accidental, but none is shown) or which produces aesthetically
+poor output in a situation which could be expected to crop up
+frequently in real-world music. It should not be used where the
+problem can be avoided with a simple workaround. It can also
+be used to flag where new code in a development version is not
+functioning as it should. This level is also used for issues
+which produce no output and fail to give the user a clue about
+what's wrong.
+
+@item
+Priority-Medium: Normal priority - use this as the default.
+
+@item
+Priority-Low: A minor problem which produces slightly undesirable
+output, or which will only occur in contrived examples, or which
+is very easily worked around.
+
+@item
+Priority-Postponed: no fix planned. Generally used for things
+which nobody wants to touch.
+
+@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-new}
+(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)
+
+Other labels:
+
+@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.
+
+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
+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
+(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.
+
+@item
+Warning: graphical output is fine, but lilypond prints a
+false/misleading warning message. Alternately, a warning should
+be printed (such as a bar line error), but was not. Also applies
+to warnings when compiling the source code or generating
+documentation.
+
+@item
+Security: might potentially be used.
+
+@item
+Performance: might potentially be used.
+
+@end itemize
+
+If you particularly want to add a label not in the list, go
+ahead, but this is not recommended.
+
+
+@node Adding issues to the tracker
+@section Adding issues to the tracker
+
+@warning{This should only be done by the Bug Squad or experienced
+developers. Normal users should not do this; instead, they should
+follow the guidelines for @rweb{Bug reports}.}
+
+In order to assign labels to issues, Bug Squad members should log
+in to their google account before adding an item.
+
+@enumerate
+
+@item
+Check if the issue falls into any previous category given on the
+relevant checklists in @ref{Bug Squad checklists}. If in doubt,
+add a new issue for a report. We would prefer to have some
+incorrectly-added issues rather than lose information that should
+have been added.
+
+@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.
+
+Include output with the first applicable method:
+
+@itemize
+
+@item
+If the issue has a notation example which fits in one system,
+generate a small @file{bug.preview.png} file with:
+
+@example
+lilypond -dpreview bug.ly
+@end example
+
+@item
+If the issue has an example which requires more than one system
+(i.e. a spacing bug), generate a @file{bug.png} file with:
+
+@example
+lilypond --png bug.ly
+@end example
+
+@item
+If the issue requires one or two pages of output, then generate a
+@file{bug.png} file with the normal:
+
+@example
+lilypond --png bug.ly
+@end example
+
+@item
+If the issue cannot be shown with less than three pages, then
+generate a @file{bug.pdf} file with:
+
+@example
+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.
+
+
+@end itemize
+
+@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{user} and
+@code{bugs}), then reply to all those mailing lists as well. The
+email should contain a link to the issue you just added.
+
+@end enumerate
+
+
+
+@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 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
+message) on the webgit page:
+
+@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.
+
+@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
+
+@subsubheading Project overview
+
+Grid view provides the best overview:
+
+@example
+@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?mode=grid&y=Priority&x=Type&cells=ids}
+@end example
+
+@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
+
+@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
+
+@subsubheading Patches to review
+
+Patches which have no @qq{obvious} problems:
+
+@example
+@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=2&q=label:patch-review}
+@end example
+
+
+
projects / lilypond.git / blobdiff