293117 - Need silent mass-reassigns of bugs from several Firefox and Core components to default owners

Status: RESOLVED INCOMPLETE

(bugzilla.mozilla.org :: General, defect, P1)

Description

[Dave Miller [:justdave]]

"We need to silently reassign all Firefox bugs which are currently assigned to
[e-mail].  There are approx. 4,000 of them. These should all be
reassigned to the default owner and QA for the component.   Any that are marked
as blocking 1.1 should be assigned to mconnor for triage.  Ideally, this should
be done in a way which does not bring down bugzilla nor spam everyone into
oblivion."

While doing this, all bugs assigned to [e-mail] in the Core product
also need to be reassigned to the default component owner+qa. (approximately 2000)

All bugs in any products Build Config component with [e-mail] as
the QA need to get changed to the default QA (but leave the owner alone). 
Currently this is 143 in the Mozilla App Suite product and 1 in the Core product.

Pending successfuly testing of the scripts against a database backup, this
should all be done sometime in the next few hours.

Comment 1

[timeless]

i'm not sure i'm covered to catch all such bugs if they flip hands. i'm also not quite sure what we gain 
by poking lastdiffed. why not let the change be noticed the next time someone touches a bug? it'd help 
me since i'm trying to keep archives of bug activity and this change would otherwise result in a gap in 
my records.

Comment 2

[Dave Miller [:justdave]]

(In reply to comment #1)
> why not let the change be noticed the next time someone touches a bug?

It'll get caught overnight by the cronjob that sends unsent bugmail whether
anyone touches it or not. :(  Otherwise that wasn't a bad idea.

Comment 3

[Jon Granrose]

please be sure to reassign the QA for my resolved but unverified bugs as well -
I see 753, not 153.  Thanks.

Comment 4

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

I see this will encompass changing the qa which is great, as there are 800+
where QA is an invalid address of [e-mail]. Is there a public list of
default QAs?

Comment 5

[Dave Miller [:justdave]]

(In reply to comment #4)
> Is there a public list of default QAs?

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describecomponents.cgi then pick a product to view

Comment 6

[Dave Miller [:justdave]]

FYI, this was blocked on getting some space freed up on one of the database
servers to be able to restore a backup copy to a separate database to test this
on before running it on the live server.  That space got freed up a few days
ago, but I've been dealing with the UMO-related end of the security firedrill
stuff for the 1.0.4 release since then.  I should be back on this again shortly
after 1.0.4 is out.

Comment 7

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

needs to be done also for Jean-Francois ([e-mail]) AFAIK, for mailnews: compososition and possibly others. Hopefully jf will comment here.

Comment 8

[Jean-Francois Ducarroz]

Mu contribution those days is mostly limited to code reviews and consulting. Fell free to reassign all my bugs...

Comment 9

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

also [e-mail] who is listed as QA on many bugs (she is "retired")

Comment 10

[Dave Miller [:justdave]]

yeesh, this certainly got dropped on the floor. :(

Do we still need this done?  It's been a while, I suspect folks might have given up and just done it by now, but maybe not.

We have cool tricks up our sleeves for doing this now thanks to the stuff we did for the mass unconfirmed resolving last month.

Comment 11

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

still legit I think. But many components are listed as [e-mail] - there isn't something better?

(Too bad changes like this affect last modified date - gives the false impression that something signficant happened in the bug)

Comment 12

[Christian :Biesinger (don't email me, ping me on IRC)]

(In reply to comment #11)
> But many components are listed as [e-mail] -

they may have a watchable QA contact

Comment 13

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #11)
> > But many components are listed as [e-mail] -
> 
> they may have a watchable QA contact

true

in FF all have a QA
but in core 1/3 don't have a QA - 16 don't, 32 do

Comment 14

[timeless]

places w/o watchable qa should have bugs in mozilla.org:bugzilla components & keywords filed requesting a watchable qa (suggest one to speed the process, and feel free to file one bug requesting a number of related qas be created at the same time).

justdave: i'm still recovering from the mess gerv made in his bug destruction. i'd much rather we did this 100 bugs every second week (possibly say 10/day) one component at a time until we run out. the result is a negligible amount of bugmail per user per day and people can actually help triage the bugs as they go by.

to help people, we should announce in this bug which component is being changed (when we start working on a component, when we've finished reassigning a component).

Comment 15

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

Is there still anything to do here? If so, do we care enough to do it? And do we care enough to take the extra effort to avoid the bugspam?

[e-mail] is no longer a valid Bugzilla account.
[e-mail] has 1138 bugs assigned to it.
[e-mail] is QA for 100 bugs.

Gerv

Comment 16

[Reed Loden [:reed]]

(In reply to comment #15)
> [e-mail] is no longer a valid Bugzilla account.

[e-mail] has been replaced with [e-mail]

Comment 17

[Dave Miller [:justdave]]

If we still want this, reopen it.  It's been a year and a half since Gerv asked for clarification and there's been no response.