clean up whiteboard if re-proposing an older bug #40

Open
opened 2015-04-03 11:25:24 +00:00 by kparal · 7 comments
Owner

Sometimes people re-propose an older bug - either for a different milestone, or reopen a bug from an older release. When that happens, it seems that BlockerBugs App doesn't correct adjust Whiteboard. An example is here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1164492#c26

The bug was accepted in F21, and now proposed for F22 Beta. But AcceptedBlocker was not removed from the whiteboard.

I think we should clear all of AcceptedBlocker and RejectedBlocker from whiteboard in these cases, provided that the proposal has not been re-raised against an already blocking tracker bug.

Sometimes people re-propose an older bug - either for a different milestone, or reopen a bug from an older release. When that happens, it seems that BlockerBugs App doesn't correct adjust Whiteboard. An example is here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1164492#c26 The bug was accepted in F21, and now proposed for F22 Beta. But `AcceptedBlocker` was not removed from the whiteboard. I think we should clear all of `AcceptedBlocker` and `RejectedBlocker` from whiteboard in these cases, provided that the proposal has not been re-raised against an already blocking tracker bug.

Yeah, re-proposing basically is not fully supported. This would be an addition to #320.

Yeah, re-proposing basically is not fully supported. This would be an addition to #320.
Owner

Marking as a bug not a feature request because the UI offers re-proposing, so it's a feature that's there but broken, not a missing feature :D

Marking as a bug not a feature request because the UI *offers* re-proposing, so it's a feature that's there but broken, not a missing feature :D
Owner

Metadata Update from @adamwill:

  • Issue tagged with: bug
**Metadata Update from @adamwill**: - Issue tagged with: bug
Author
Owner

See https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blockerbugs/issue/225 for another report of this, and some proposals how to handle it.

See https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blockerbugs/issue/225 for another report of this, and some proposals how to handle it.
Author
Owner

Metadata Update from @kparal:

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

Issue tagged with: next

Issue tagged with: next
Author
Owner

Metadata Update from @kparal:

  • Custom field story_points adjusted to 3
  • Issue priority set to: Normal (was: High)
**Metadata Update from @kparal**: - Custom field story_points adjusted to 3 - Issue priority set to: Normal (was: High)
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
3 participants
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#40
No description provided.