Mike Auty suggested we assign Ebuilds bugs to maintainer-wanted@ automatically in a private message to me. I think this is a good idea. It is my perception that many developers browse through the bugs assigned to maintainer-wanted@ from time to time, so that maintenance of that list (finding duplicates and so on) is performed quite regularly. [1] I invite him to post the text of that message here. Maybe this needs some chat on gentoo-dev@ first.
No, it shouldn't be maintainer-wanted just by default. We need to get the automatic assignment working, and use that data. But even when we have that, if there isn't any other option, maintainer-wanted is not the right thing. bug-wranglers is, to explictly state that no developer has looked at it yet. I don't browse M-W, but I do browse bug-wranglers and do some assignment.
(In reply to comment #1) > No, it shouldn't be maintainer-wanted just by default. > > We need to get the automatic assignment working, and use that data. That would generally require a form with fixed SELECT fields for CATEGORY (taken from the current tree as gentoo-x86/*-*/*) and PKG, I guess, whereas maintainer-wanted bugs could introduce new categories and obviously package names. > But even when we have that, if there isn't any other option, maintainer-wanted > is not the right thing. bug-wranglers is, to explictly state that no developer > has looked at it yet. Does maintainer-wanted not explicitly state the very same thing? :)
Another problem is that most bug reports about new submitted packages don't contain "Ebuilds" in component... And there's of course always the danger of excessive misuse of that field...
Here's the existing description on ebuilds: "Ebuilds: Component for adding ebuilds. They will be moved by a developer to the correct component." This unfortunately conflates new packages with version and revision bumps. What if we explicitly add a component, "New Packages" and have that going to M-W, and training users to NOT put version bumps into it (include some suitable text in the description).
For reference, in case it helps, here's the email I sent Jer: Hiya Jer, I'm a bit of an intermittent wrangler at the moment, so sorry about that, but I just noticed that a fair amount of time/bugs in the current list is taken up with user submitted ebuilds. Usually when I respond to these, I mark them as enhancements, assign them to maintainer-wanted, leave a message indicating that their ebuild might get more exposure if they contact project sunrise and on the very rare occasion CC in a relevant herd. That usually ends up as a fair bit of work to do, and recently there seem to have been a lot of them (and they're easy to spot). So my thought was, what if there were a top level (product) section for User Submitted Ebuilds, which could automatically set the assignee, be easy to filter (easier to find than EBUILD/Inclusion keywords or looking for maintainer-wanted bugs)? I don't know enough about bugzilla, but perhaps it could automatically mark them as enhancements, and mention project sunrise in some way? Does that seem like a good idea to help the bug wranglers focus on triaging real bugs, or am I dealing with "new ebuild" bugs in the wrong way? I don't know who you'd actually talk to about this to get it done, and it might need a -dev vote or something, but it seems like it a could be a sensible time saver, distributing the work amongst the submitter of new ebuilds, rather than on the few wranglers. What do you think? Mike 5:)
Well, I don't think this is 1:1. 'Bug wranglers' means 'someone needs to take a look at it', 'maintainer-wanted' means 'someone may want to take a look at this package, someday'. Having default assignment like that would probably omit the initial b-w review, that includes looking for duplicates, setting keywords and possibly CC-ing parties of potential interest in package.
