387230 - Add missing default QA contacts to components

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

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

Description

[Henrik Skupin [:whimboo][⌚️UTC+2]]

Before we can do any changes to bug 386750 each component should have a default QA contact. Currently there are some components which don't have set anything. That makes us impossible to watch this specific component.

I've taken a look on different products/components. Following items doesn't have a default QA contact:

Composer
========
Each component

Mozilla Application Suite
=========================
Composer
Download Manager
Installer: XPI Packages
MailNews: Account Manager
MailNews: Main Mail Window
MailNews: Notification
MailNews: Subscribe
Page Info
Password Manager
Preferences
Sidebar
XP Apps
XP Apps: Autocomplete
XP Apps: GUI Features

Core
====
Form Manager
IPC

Directory
=========
Each component

JSS
===
Each component

mozilla.org
===========
Test Tracker

Documentation
=============
Web Developer

Mozilla Localizations
=====================
ast-ES / Asturian
es-ES / Spanish
Other

Websites
========
bittorrent.mozilla.org

Timeless, can you assign the default QA contact to each of the listed components? If you need some help just ask.

Comment 1

[timeless]

no. i don't have editusers, i can't recycle accounts.

Comment 2

[Reed Loden [:reed]]

(In reply to comment #0)
> Composer

[e-mail]: How do you want the QA contacts done?

> Mozilla Application Suite

kairo: How do you want the QA contacts done?

> Core

These can just be done.

> Directory

[e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]: How do you want the QA contacts done?

> JSS

[e-mail]: How do you want the QA contacts done?

> mozilla.org
> ===========
> Test Tracker

Asa owns this, but the component looks dead, so I'd recommend we move the 9 bugs out of it and delete it.

> Documentation
> =============
> Web Developer

I would love to see the entire Documentation product removed, as it's completely useless. PRD Change Request can move somewhere else, and the product could be deprecated. Until then, Web Developer and Help Viewer could have their default assignee moved to QA contact and [e-mail] be used as the default assignee.

> Mozilla Localizations
> =====================
> ast-ES / Asturian
> es-ES / Spanish
> Other

These should be just be done in order to match the others.

> Websites
> ========
> bittorrent.mozilla.org

This component has one bug, and bittorrent.mozilla.org doesn't even exist anymore, so we should just move the bug and delete the component.

Comment 3

[Robert Kaiser]

(In reply to comment #2)
> > Mozilla Application Suite
> 
> kairo: How do you want the QA contacts done?

See bug 298904 - it has that info as well.

Comment 4

[Henrik Skupin [:whimboo][⌚️UTC+2]]

(In reply to comment #3)
> See bug 298904 - it has that info as well.

After a discussion with Robert on IRC I set his bug as blocker. We should finish the reorganization first before spending any more work on the old "Mozilla Application Suite" component.

Comment 5

[Mark Smith [:mcs]]

For Directory/LDAP, there is no QA team (testing is done by developers, and as part of product releases such as TBird).  Does the default QA contact need to point to a Bugzilla account or can it be a placeholder?

Comment 6

[:Gavin Sharp [email: [e-mail]]]

(In reply to comment #5)
> Does the default QA contact need to point to a Bugzilla account or can it be a
> placeholder?

It doesn't need to point to a real person's Bugzilla account - in fact, a placeholder account is encouraged. It makes it easier for people interested to "watch" a component without having to watch a specific person, and reduces admin overhead by eliminating the need to update the default QA should that person stop being involved with the project.

Comment 7

[Mark Smith [:mcs]]

Thanks; that (In reply to comment #6)
> It doesn't need to point to a real person's Bugzilla account - in fact, a
> placeholder account is encouraged....

OK; thanks for clarifying.  Here is my proposal for the Directory product:

  Component        Default QA Contact
  --------------   -------------------------
  LDAP C SDK       [e-mail]
  LDAP Java SDK    [e-mail]
  LDAP Tools       [e-mail]
  LDAP XPCOM SDK   [e-mail]
  PerLDAP          [e-mail]

Comment 8

[Henrik Skupin [:whimboo][⌚️UTC+2]]

(In reply to comment #7)
>   Component        Default QA Contact
>   --------------   -------------------------
>   LDAP C SDK       [e-mail]
>   LDAP Java SDK    [e-mail]
>   LDAP Tools       [e-mail]
>   LDAP XPCOM SDK   [e-mail]
>   PerLDAP          [e-mail]

Mark, are you also ok with removing the "-qa" part from the default contacts? We don't have this part in all the other ones.

Comment 9

[Mark Smith [:mcs]]

(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> Mark, are you also ok with removing the "-qa" part from the default contacts?
> We don't have this part in all the other ones.

Sure, as long as there are no plans for other type of default contacts.

Comment 10

[Dan Mosedale (:dmosedale, :dmose)]

Mark: default-assignee is another...

Comment 11

[Mark Smith [:mcs]]

(In reply to comment #10)
> Mark: default-assignee is another...

Of course... I was not thinking about this correctly when I wrote comment #9.  I would prefer to keep the names I suggested (with "-qa" in them) but I do not feel too strongly about it.

Comment 12

[Robert Kaiser]

Nowadays, we usually go and (correctly) assign new bugs to [e-mail] by default and use a watchable QA contact, so that anyone who might want to work on the bugs has set to watch that QA address and then reassigns to himself if he really does work on it.
At least that's what we do in most areas where we don't want bugs assigned to a specific person by default.

Comment 13

[Marcia Knous [:marcia]]

Reed: Do you have time to help me make these changes?

Comment 14

[Reed Loden [:reed]]

(In reply to comment #13)
> Reed: Do you have time to help me make these changes?

Ok, I just did the Directory ones. I created the QA contacts they needed and assigned them. Do want to use [e-mail] as the default assignee for the Directory components?

I'll take a look at the others when I have time.

Comment 15

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

To answer Henrik's question on my blog: this doesn't need to wait for the reorganisation. It's a non-intrusive change. As for the exact form of the names, it's best to try and be as consistent with existing practice as possible. So if existing ones have "-qa", use that. If existing ones are @<component>.bugs, do that (although watch out for duplicate component names across products).

Gerv

Comment 16

[Dan Mosedale (:dmosedale, :dmose)]

(In reply to comment #14)
>
> Ok, I just did the Directory ones. I created the QA contacts they needed and
> assigned them. Do want to use [e-mail] as the default assignee for
> the Directory components?

Yes for the XPCOM wrapper; other folks will need to comment on the other components.

Comment 17

[Mark Smith [:mcs]]

(In reply to comment #14)
> Ok, I just did the Directory ones. I created the QA contacts they needed and
> assigned them. Do want to use [e-mail] as the default assignee for
> the Directory components?

Yes for all of the Directory components.

Comment 18

[Reed Loden [:reed]]

(In reply to comment #17)
> (In reply to comment #14)
> > Ok, I just did the Directory ones. I created the QA contacts they needed and
> > assigned them. Do want to use [e-mail] as the default assignee for
> > the Directory components?
> 
> Yes for all of the Directory components.

Done.

Comment 19

[Henrik Skupin [:whimboo][⌚️UTC+2]]

(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > Composer
> 
> [e-mail]: How do you want the QA contacts done?

Daniel, can we get an answer please? Thanks.

> > Core
> 
> These can just be done.

Looks like "Form Manager" was deleted. What about IPC? It's still missing. 

> > mozilla.org
> > ===========
> > Test Tracker
> 
> Asa owns this, but the component looks dead, so I'd recommend we move the 9
> bugs out of it and delete it.

Asa, would that be ok?

> > Mozilla Localizations
> > =====================
> 
> These should be just be done in order to match the others.

A bunch of locales have a real person as qa contact set.

Comment 20

[:glob ✱]

closing bug due to inactivity.  please re-open this bug if still relevant.

Comment 21

[Henrik Skupin [:whimboo][⌚️UTC+2]]

Now that we do no longer set [e-mail] as default QA but make use of this field for a real person, I don't think this bug is valid anymore and should be indeed wontfix.