Closed
Bug 129765
Opened 23 years ago
Closed 21 years ago
Bonsai reporting should add checkin comments to the relevant bugs.
Categories
(Webtools Graveyard :: Bonsai, defect)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
DUPLICATE
of bug 199116
People
(Reporter: selmer, Assigned: kiko)
Details
There is an obvious gap in our automated systems. Bugzilla knows all the work we think is worth doing. Bonsai knows all the work we have done. The two systems don't talk to each other directly. The bonsai reporting mechanism should be enhanced to add a comment to the bug(s) listed in the cvs checkin comments. Ideally, it would include a link to the diffs represented by the checkin. If more than one bug applies for a given checkin it might help to designate the first bug in the list as the primary (although I can see reasons to treat them all the same as well.) Why do this? All the information we need is already in the reports bonsai generates. The information is useful in its own right to see what the progress of the bug is and to easily find the changes that were checked in for the bug. In addition, it would help us in managing our projects to see which branches the patches have landed on and exactly what time that happened. (Today, if the bug gets updated at all you usually only have the time the comment was added in the bug to indicate about when the checkin happened.) (Sorry if I got the wrong version setting, I don't know what the right one would be.)
Hmmm... this seems quite similar to bug 6422. Was this the one you were looking for, Dave?
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•23 years ago
|
||
bug 6422 is much more comprehensive than what I'm asking for and may create unwanted interdependencies between the systems. I'm looking for a simple post of a comment to the affected bug(s) from bonsai/cvs to bugzilla. Just adding a comment should not create undue interdependencies and should itself be harmless. It's also OK if it fails some of the time or posts to the "wrong" bug some of the time, as long as it's a very small percentage. We can work out the glitches over time. I believe the semantics of closing the bug at checkin are wrong because it doesn't have any way to account for branches separately from the trunk. (We use keywords to denote checkin status for branches instead of changing the resolution of the bug.) It's probably possible to get all that figured out, but it's not a prerequisite of what I'm requesting here. (If you were closing the bug, you'd want these comments anyway, so what I'm asking for is a subset of what bug 6422 is asking for.)
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•22 years ago
|
||
I will try and code this today.
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•22 years ago
|
||
Hey, folks. I need a spec on what the comment should look like, I'm not feeling very creative today. Anybody care to chip in? BTW, my implementation is independent of Bonsai.
Assignee: tara → kiko
Reporter | ||
Comment 5•22 years ago
|
||
Would the information and format from Bonsai be sufficient? It shows columns for When, Who, File, Rev, +/-, and Description. File and Rev are links to the diffs and Description is the checkin comment. The Rev number on Bonsai is context sensitive to the branch for the checkin, so for this purpose the Branch tag should be included in the comment. The Who field may be redundant if the comment is posted as the person doing the checkin, but it's critical if the comment is not posted from that person. If all that information is there and readable, then it doesn't need a whole lot of work on making it pretty. Something like putting each item on its own line with a label would be sufficient for a first cut patch. Thanks a lot for taking this on!
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•22 years ago
|
||
Unfortunately I don't think I can add a comment as the user without having a "master password" facility in Bugzilla, which I don't think we really want. Revision, who, branch, file, comment seem great. The shame is that we can't link to bonsai easily from bugzilla, but if somebody comes up with a nice proposal to linkify file name links, I'll cook it up after this is done.
Reporter | ||
Comment 7•22 years ago
|
||
Although you can't have bugzilla just do the right thing, can't you just put the URL into the comment body as "http://..."?
Reporter | ||
Comment 8•22 years ago
|
||
Even without the linking stuff, it would be great to get the basic version of this going. Any chance of getting the basic mechanism in place and worrying about the rest of the details later? Just having the checkin comment and the revision info be a huge improvement.
you can certainly use this format: http://bonsai.mozilla.org/cvsblame.cgi?file=mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi&rev=1.18 alternatively you could reference to a bonsai query for the date range by the person. http://bonsai.mozilla.org/cvsquery.cgi?treeid=default&module=all&branch=HEAD&branchtype=match&who=gerv&whotype=regexp&date=explicit&mindate=3%2F23%2F2002+09%3A58%3A00&maxdate=3%2F23%2F2002+09%3A58%3A00&cvsroot=%2Fcvsroot i'm not quite sure i understand selmer's branch comment. anyone can later map a version back to a branch. given the original request, i'd suggest a cvsquery url. it only requires one. The only problem i see is when a username changes. We could probably modify bonsai so that it supported queries by user number and the urls it generated for bugzilla used them. from my perspective, the bonsai side isn't particularly tough. the big issue is the fact that you're creating a bugzilla key and giving it to bonsai. i'd suggest creating a bonsai account (perhaps checkin-daemon@bonsai.mozilla.org) in bugzilla, setting a param for it in bonsai and bugzilla, and configuring bugzilla so that the account can comment on any bug and would never receive output from cgis (including but not limited to process mail, process bug, and show bug). That should minimize most risks. As for a bugzilla comment spec: a single url. nothing more :).
Reporter | ||
Comment 10•22 years ago
|
||
> i'm not quite sure i understand selmer's branch comment. anyone can later map a
> version back to a branch.
Many bugs have multiple checkins associated with them. A typical pattern is for
a fix to be checked in on the trunk and then also on a release branch. The
automatic annotation of those checkins *in the bug* has high value IMO, but the
bug comment needs to state *where* the checkin occured in order to maximize that
value.
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•22 years ago
|
||
I have a proof of concept working, just needs some polishing up; I got sidetracked by Real Life<tm> but I'm on it
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Comment 12•22 years ago
|
||
I like the second URL suggested by timeless in comment 9. But instead of a raw URL, I would prefer a shorter link text, for example: 2002-03-23 09:58 HEAD gerv On longer bugs it could be hard to find the checkin comments if there is more than one. Maybe the checkin comments should be a summary of all the checkins so far, for example: 2002-03-23 09:58 HEAD gerv 2002-03-27 23:00 BRANCH_1_0 selmer It also would be nice to have a tool to generate checkin comments for an existing Bonsai/Bugzilla database.
Comment 13•22 years ago
|
||
This is such an essential bug that should be fixed. It would increase the ability for anyone to quickly see which files go with which bug.
Comment 14•22 years ago
|
||
This is such an essential bug that should be fixed. It would increase the ability for anyone to quickly see which files go with which bug. This is a small change, and many people (as you can see from the above comments) have already made patches. I hope its implemented.
Assignee | ||
Comment 15•21 years ago
|
||
Dave Swegan and I are working on an implementation that is based on a Bonsai-free loginfo script. It's a better approach than having Bonsai do the job for many reasons (simplicity, less changes to both tools, speed, lack of Bonsai requirement, etc). This is not strictly a dupe, since the original request was for Bonsai reporting, but the essential functionality is identical, and Dave's bug has a patch (that I failed to produce here), so done. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 199116 ***
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 21 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
Updated•8 years ago
|
Product: Webtools → Webtools Graveyard
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•