[Foundation-l] Re: technical issues management

[Kate]

Ashar Voultoiz wrote:

> As I understand your plan, 'Wikimedia web' product on bugzilla will be
> closed/deleted and bug moved to otrs. 

i've created a new bugzilla product, "Issues".  i don't think "Wikimedia
websites" will disappear, since it's still a reasonable method to report
problems, whereas Issues is only editable by developers.

bugs get opened in issues when someone sends a problem report to OTRS. 
at the moment they're assigned to me, but i'll probably create another
mailing list (announce-only, like wikibugs-l) for it.

> What about an issue reported to
> the noc that then need to be moved to bugzilla ?

someone can open a bug in bugzilla on behalf of the person who mailed
noc about it. (or just tell them to do that.. as long as it gets moved
somehow).

> Looks like dev/sysadmin will have to look at both interfaces if they
> want to get the full history of the problem.

well, the idea is that only one person has to look at OTRS, and any
other developers can see all current issues in bugzilla (via the Issues
product).  the reason i used OTRS for that is to act as a 'filter'
between users reporting problems, and extracting actual issues which
need to be solved from that.
 
> You can probably set up bugzilla to have several virtual admin teams
> (dns, squids, apaches, hardware, kennisnet). All new messages could be
> assigned to the issue manager with an 'unconfirmed' status he will then
> give out the bug to one of the virtual teams that can then deal with the
> problem.

would each team be a mailing list?  i was thinking of an all-developers@
list to assign bugs to by default (at the moment they're assigned to me,
but that's not a very good solution).

> > the issues manager can then formulate a list of tasks required to resolve each
> > issue, and place them on a wiki page somewhere (probably split by particular
> > people, and tasks for all developers).  there's then a central place to look to
> > know what needs to be done.  further, this can be used to produce a list of
> > open and resolved problems on the site, and what was done to fix them, to keep
> > users and the board better informed of what's going on.  (for example, a weekly
> > 'issues summary' mail to the list).
> 
> Isn't what http://wp.wikidev.net/ is for ? Some troublechecking guide
> would probably be useful.

i was going to use wikidev for it, but i think it's more useful for that
to go on bugzilla now.  of course, documenting things on wikidev is
still a good idea ;-) (and the server admin log shouldn't go away).
 
> > this can also be used as central point of contact for communications with
> > outside partners, such as Kennisnet and Lost Oasis (although purely for
> > technical matters, not negotiations).

> Just one last thing: what about issues being reported on IRC ? Should
> users be redirected to the new interface ? If so we might as well
> moderate the channel.

well.. if people want to report issues via IRC, it's fine, but i think
the general attitude should be that if it's not sent to noc@, there's no
guarantee it'll get fixed.  the user doesn't have to do that, of course
- a developer who happens to be on IRC, or whatever, can open a new
ticket.  i definitely don't want to start ignoring people trying to
report problems, however they do it, since the idea of this is to make
it _easier_, not _harder_...
 
kate.