bugimg shows invalid information #147

Open
opened 2020-10-20 08:59:01 +00:00 by kparal · 6 comments
Owner

From https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/16 :

bugimg.png

But https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1861700 only has:

Whiteboard: AcceptedBlocker AcceptedFreezeException
Blocks: 	F33FinalFreezeException, FinalFreezeException F34BetaBlocker 

How come?

From https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/16 : [![bugimg.png](/fedora-qa/blockerbugs/issue/raw/files/20f5a938af3791db8eccf4fc8fb2f3cd2c86452e315d0314efd1ffa46c95487f-bugimg.png)](/fedora-qa/blockerbugs/issue/raw/files/20f5a938af3791db8eccf4fc8fb2f3cd2c86452e315d0314efd1ffa46c95487f-bugimg.png) But https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1861700 only has: ``` Whiteboard: AcceptedBlocker AcceptedFreezeException Blocks: F33FinalFreezeException, FinalFreezeException F34BetaBlocker ``` How come?
Author
Owner

To be clear, both RejectedBlockers (33-beta and 33-final) shouldn't be displayed (or I'm misunderstanding something).

To be clear, both RejectedBlockers (33-beta and 33-final) shouldn't be displayed (or I'm misunderstanding something).
Author
Owner

@lbrabec talked to me about this and I already managed to forget half of it. But the basic issue seems to be that whenever a bug is proposed against some blocker milestone and then the milestone gets removed, that bug proposal is marked as rejected (even though there doesn't have to be a RejectedBlocker in the Whiteboard). I'm not sure whether this is a bug or intentional and why. But that's how BBA is currently implemented. And the discussion code then inherits this.

In order to fix this, we need to look at why BBA behaves the way it does (that only amplifies the need to document your code, let's see if we did that or not), and possibly fix a bug (looking into the Whiteboard) or say this is how we want this (I'm not convinced at this moment).

@lbrabec talked to me about this and I already managed to forget half of it. But the basic issue seems to be that whenever a bug is proposed against some blocker milestone and then the milestone gets removed, that bug proposal is marked as rejected (even though there doesn't have to be a `RejectedBlocker` in the `Whiteboard`). I'm not sure whether this is a bug or intentional and why. But that's how BBA is currently implemented. And the discussion code then inherits this. In order to fix this, we need to look at why BBA behaves the way it does (that only amplifies the need to document your code, let's see if we did that or not), and possibly fix a bug (looking into the Whiteboard) or say this is how we want this (I'm not convinced at this moment).
Author
Owner

Metadata Update from @kparal:

  • Issue priority set to: Normal (was: High)
**Metadata Update from @kparal**: - Issue priority set to: Normal (was: High)
Author
Owner

Metadata Update from @kparal:

  • Assignee reset
**Metadata Update from @kparal**: - Assignee reset
Author
Owner

Metadata Update from @kparal:

  • Issue tagged with: next
**Metadata Update from @kparal**: - Issue tagged with: next
Author
Owner

Metadata Update from @kparal:

  • Custom field story_points adjusted to 5
**Metadata Update from @kparal**: - Custom field story_points adjusted to 5
kparal added this to the Next BB tasks project 2026-01-16 15:28:57 +00:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
quality/blockerbugs#147
No description provided.