OTA-787: enhancements/update/update-blocker-lifecycle: Port from Bugzilla to Jira #1323
Conversation
Brenton pointed out some workflow adjustments to make the
component-team response more Jira-native [1], and this updates the
enhancement to formalize those changes.
I'm still leaving the original labels on the bug ticket for now, until
we figure out a way to port the Jira queue queries over to use only
ticket status, but at the moment:
project != OCPBUGS AND labels in (UpgradeBlocker) AND status not in ("Code Review", ON_QA, Verified, "Release Pending", Done, Closed)
turns up things in private non-OpenShift-core projects that we'd need
to filter out, so sticking with the OCPBUGS-side labels seems easier
for now.
I've also left off the details of creating the component-team side
ticket, where we currently want:
* We create a Spike in the relevant component's Jira project
(e.g. MCO-#). Let's use TEAM-# as a placeholder.
1. Subject is: Impact ${BUG_SUBJECT}
2. Assignee is the bug assignee.
3. Body is our request template, but with 'OCPBUGS-#' replaced with the actual bug.
4. Priority is Critical, because it's hard to assess customer risk
in the absence of an impact statement. If new information
flows in that suggests further impact-statement work should be
lower-priority for that bug, folks can reduce the priority
later and explain their motivation.
5. TEAM-# blocks OCPBUGS-#, because we should be able to get an
initial draft at impact without waiting for the bug fix to
merge, be verified, or ship.
6. Label TEAM-# with UpgradeBlocker for tracking.
7. Label OCPBUGS-# with ImpactStatementRequested to move it to the
component-team queue.
Those seem like they can remain internal, mutable details for now, and
not get frozen out in the enhancement yet.
[1]: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OTA-787
wking
changed the title
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
jira/valid-reference
|
@wking: This pull request references OTA-787 which is a valid jira issue. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
/cc |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
do-not-merge/hold
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: LalatenduMohanty, petr-muller The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
approved
| Sample answers are provided to give more context and the ImpactStatementRequested label has been added to this bug. | ||
| When responding, please remove ImpactStatementRequested and set the ImpactStatementProposed label. | ||
| Sample answers are provided to give more context and the `ImpactStatementRequested` label has been added to OCPBUGS-#. | ||
| When responding, please move this ticket to `Code Review`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I do not see the separate Jira (spike) workflow anywhere in this PR. Do you want to add that in a separate PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should be the only Jira-side action that the assignee needs to take, so I've included it here (replacing their previous Bugzilla-side action). From the PR topic post:
I've also left off the details of creating the component-team side ticket, where we currently want:
...
Those seem like they can remain internal, mutable details for now, and not get frozen out in the enhancement yet.
And yeah, that's all stuff on the updates-team/robots side that I didn't want to commit to in this pull request.
|
/hold cancel |
openshift-ci
bot
removed
the
do-not-merge/hold
|
@wking: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
Brenton pointed out some workflow adjustments to make the component-team response more Jira-native, and this updates the enhancement to formalize those changes.
I'm still leaving the original labels on the bug ticket for now, until we figure out a way to port the Jira queue queries over to use only ticket status, but at the moment:
turns up things in private non-OpenShift-core projects that we'd need to filter out, so sticking with the OCPBUGS-side labels seems easier for now.
I've also left off the details of creating the component-team side ticket, where we currently want:
MCO-#). Let's useTEAM-#as a placeholder.${BUG_SUBJECT}OCPBUGS-#replaced with the actual bug.Critical, because it's hard to assess customer risk in the absence of an impact statement. If new information flows in that suggests further impact-statement work should be lower-priority for that bug, folks can reduce the priority later and explain their motivation.TEAM-#blocksOCPBUGS-#, because we should be able to get an initial draft at impact without waiting for the bug fix to merge, be verified, or ship.TEAM-#withUpgradeBlockerfor tracking.OCPBUGS-#withImpactStatementRequestedto move it to the component-team queue.Those seem like they can remain internal, mutable details for now, and not get frozen out in the enhancement yet.