[metrics-team] Trac housekeeping

Fri Sep 1 18:30:12 UTC 2017

On 2017-09-01 19:30, Damian Johnson wrote:
> Hi Karsten. Just quick food for thought that for my projects I make a
> 'bugs' landing page. This does two things...
> 
> a. Provides nice instructions to users for how to cut a ticket.
> b. Embeds a chart with all my component's issues.
> 
> Here's an example...
> 
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/stem/bugs
> 
> The only reason I mention this is because 'b' might be handy so all
> Metrics folks can refer to that page rather than a more arcane trac
> ticket search url.

Hi Damian!

We do have such a wiki page with a list of open tickets:

https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/MetricsTeam#OpenTickets

I guess in this case I wanted a slightly different query that groups by
component. This Custom Query thing is really flexible. And when you
replace "status=accepted&status=assigned&..." with "status=!closed" and
remove all the "col=something" parts, the query becomes much, much
shorter and still useful.

But in general, the list on the wiki page is a good starting point, too.
(And if one switches to page 2 one ends up in the Custom Query area anyway.)

Thanks for the suggestion!

All the best,
Karsten

> 
> Cheers! -Damian
> 
> 
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 2:10 AM, Karsten Loesing <karsten at torproject.org> wrote:
>> Hello team,
>>
>> I have been looking through the tickets under Trac's Metrics/*
>> components, and I feel we could do a better job keeping only those
>> tickets there that we actually plan to work on as a team.
>>
>> Here's the list:
>>
>> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/query?status=!closed&component=^Metrics&group=component&max=400&order=changetime
>>
>> In total, there are roughly 300 tickets on that list, many of which
>> haven't been modified in years.
>>
>> I'd rather want us to use tickets for things we're currently working on
>> or that we think we might be working on in the next 6 months. Longer
>> term plans could instead go into some "vision" section on the wiki.
>>
>> But honestly, I believe that a fair number of the open tickets has long
>> been forgotten by their reporters and owners. We can probably just close
>> 50 or 100 of these tickets without losing much information or without
>> risking running out of ideas what to work on in 6 months from now.
>>
>> How do we start this? Some ideas:
>>
>>  - We ask the network team whether they mind us closing any of the
>> tickets in Metrics/Analysis, and if they do, we kindly ask them to
>> either touch the ones they care about and ping us afterwards. Obviously,
>> having a sentence or two on the tickets why they still care about
>> something and what particular aspects they care about would help. Maybe
>> they even want to adopt some tickets into Core Tor/*.
>>
>>  - We ask ticket reporters and/or owners of tickets in
>> Metrics/Censorship analysis whether they still need to keep these
>> tickets open. It seems that most of these analyses don't require open
>> tickets anymore, and the contained analyses are still useful in closed
>> tickets when linked from the appropriate wiki pages. And while we're
>> talking about these tickets, we might want to discuss merging this
>> component with Metrics/Analysis. After all, censorship analysis is just
>> one aspect of analysis, and censorship folks could easily use a tag to
>> say that they're looking at metrics data with the primary focus of
>> censorship.
>>
>>  - We make a plan what to do with Compass, so that we can finally close
>> some of the tickets in Metrics/Compass. I still believe it's a useful
>> service, even though it seriously needs some love.
>>
>>  - The following doesn't close any tickets, but I'd like to split up
>> Metrics/Metrics website into two components: 1) Metrics/Statistics for
>> aggregating descriptors and producing CSV files and 2) Metrics/Website
>> for everything that's visible on the Tor Metrics website. This doesn't
>> imply splitting up the code base yet, though that'll be a useful next
>> step. But for now, I'd just like to separate issues/tickets. (Feel free
>> to remind me what places need an update when renaming or creating
>> components.)
>>
>>  - Again, this doesn't close any tickets, but I'd like to rename
>> Metrics/metrics-lib to Metrics/Library, reflecting that we renamed the
>> library a few weeks back.
>>
>> What else could we do to become the masters of the Metrics/* components
>> again? ("Wait, what do you mean, *again*...?")
>>
>> All the best,
>> Karsten
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> metrics-team mailing list
>> metrics-team at lists.torproject.org
>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/metrics-team
>>
> _______________________________________________
> metrics-team mailing list
> metrics-team at lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/metrics-team
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/metrics-team/attachments/20170901/59de3b58/attachment.sig>