1358284 - Need tracking and status flags for Fx56 and 57 in Bugzilla

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(bugzilla.mozilla.org :: Administration, task, P1)

Description

[Ritu Kothari (:ritu) (Inactive, please n-i to RyanVM, jcristau, or pascal)]

RelMgmt team will start working on tracking bugs for Quantum release now. We will need tracking and status flags for 56 and 57. Thanks!

Comment 1

[Emma Humphries ☕️🎸🧞‍♀️✨ (she/they) [:emceeaich] (Pacific Time) use needinfo]

In bug 1357408, ryanvm said that tracking and status flags for 56 and 57 weren't needed. Does this override that?

Comment 2

[Ritu Kothari (:ritu) (Inactive, please n-i to RyanVM, jcristau, or pascal)]

(In reply to Emma Humphries ☕️ (she/her) [:emceeaich] (UTC-8) +needinfo me from comment #1)
> In bug 1357408, ryanvm said that tracking and status flags for 56 and 57
> weren't needed. Does this override that?

Hi Emma, I think his reasons for saying No was different. He said No because 55 was on Nightly one more time post Apr18th Merge date. I am asking for these tracking flags as release managers will start tracking must-fix bugs for Quantum projects from now. And we don't have a way of doing that in Bugzilla today unless we add the flags for 56 and 57.

Comment 3

[David Lawrence [:dkl]]

Sorry for delay. These have been added.

dkl

Comment 4

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

I'm already seeing these flags getting erroneously set on new bugs (that clearly aren't Quantum-focused bugs). Is anybody going to be triaging them and changing them appropriately?

Comment 5

[Emma Humphries ☕️🎸🧞‍♀️✨ (she/they) [:emceeaich] (Pacific Time) use needinfo]

I found 19 bugs with status flags for 57 set to non-empty. 

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?o1=isnotempty&f1=cf_status_firefox57&order=Importance&resolution=---&query_format=advanced

All of them appear to have been set by the bug's filers. 

Do we need to do some education around when to set these flags? If there are criteria somewhere, I can draft a message to the various forums (email lists, blogs, weekly status meeting.)

Alternatively, do we need to make the 56 and 57 status flags something that users nominate bugs for?

Comment 6

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

I'm wondering if for now we should restrict their visibility/setting to RelMan. I'll posit that most of those 19 were set accidentally.

Comment 7

[Ritu Kothari (:ritu) (Inactive, please n-i to RyanVM, jcristau, or pascal)]

One alternative is to hide the status flags for 56/57 and only leave the tracking flags visible to all. Or we could make both status and tracking flags for 56/57 limited to relman and quantum team.

Comment 8

[Emma Humphries ☕️🎸🧞‍♀️✨ (she/they) [:emceeaich] (Pacific Time) use needinfo]

Dylan can we restrict the the status flags for 56 and 57 to relman? If we wanted to restrict to quantum, I'm assuming we'd need to create and manage a group for that?

Comment 9

[Dylan Hardison [:dylan] (he/him)]

That is right. We can restrict those flags to an arbitrary group, including a new group.

Comment 10

[Emma Humphries ☕️🎸🧞‍♀️✨ (she/they) [:emceeaich] (Pacific Time) use needinfo]

I'm going to make a new ticket to restrict the status flags for 56 and 57 to relman, and a ticket to make Jean, Harald, and Esham into a group who can set flags for 56 and 57.

Comment 11

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

FYI, I just cleaned up 92 erroneously set status-firefox57 flags, so thanks in advance for restricting its usage :)

Comment 12

[Emma Humphries ☕️🎸🧞‍♀️✨ (she/they) [:emceeaich] (Pacific Time) use needinfo]

Owch! Yeah, let's make this a priority.