Kent, Patrick, any chance you can look into the reviews Jörg is waiting for? The patches seem fairly small, so I hope for a quick review. Philipp On 10/11/17 11:36 PM, Jörg Knobloch wrote: > > *Activities last week:* > Fixed bustage, release activities for TB 52.4 ESR, looked for and > fixed regressions, various reviews > <https://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/pushloghtml>, misc. bug fixes, > sheriffing. List below. Notable: > - Severe Necko bustage now completely fixed and all related tests > re-enabled and passing again. > > *Obstacles and impediments:* > Slow reviews as noted below, *twelve *and *nine *weeks delay so far > (does anyone read the reports or are they just ignored?) > Still no automatic Daily updates, no L10n Dailies.* > * > > *General remarks:* > C-C tree status: *Deteriorating *(improved from last week, details > below), no manpower to investigate various intermittent test failures. > > Jörg. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Tree status classification: Green, Normal (some failures), > *Deteriorating *(many failures, opt builds still green, some > switched-off tests), Critical (opt builds with failures), Blocked > (less than two platforms), Doomed. > > Landed: > > 1. ** {{bug|1406539}} bustage-fix (trivial, remove include) > 2. ** {{bug|1403771}} Necko bustage (final patches) > 3. ** {{bug|1406574}} bustage-fix (DisplayHTMLInMessagePane()) > 4. ** {{bug|1403658}} bustage-fix follow up (nsString overload of > HTMLAnchorElement::GetName(), etc. > 5. ** {{bug|1407229}} DOM image/link changes > > Prepared patches now awaiting review: > > 1. ** {{bug|1380799}} Date/time formatting in chat logging to use > mozIntl *(since 2017-07-17)* > 2. ** {{bug|1320191}} Hotmail Deleted folder *(since 2017-08-09)* > 3. ** {{bug|1389173}} LDAP URLs > > > === Dates (7) === > Tu 10 Oct 2017: 4.67 hours > Mo 9 Oct 2017: 3.57 hours > Su 8 Oct 2017: 1.08 hours > Sa 7 Oct 2017: 6.35 hours > Fr 6 Oct 2017: 4.17 hours > Th 5 Oct 2017: 2.50 hours > We 4 Oct 2017: 4.22 hours > === Activities === > Administration              8 min,  0.13 hours ( 0.5%) > Bustage fixes             946 min, 15.77 hours (59.4%) > BMO follow-up              78 min,  1.30 hours ( 4.9%) > Other bug fixes            92 min,  1.53 hours ( 5.8%) > Volunteer Triaging         25 min,  0.42 hours ( 1.6%) > Bugfixes for Regressions   30 min,  0.50 hours ( 1.9%) > Sheriffing                170 min,  2.83 hours (10.7%) > Releases (incl. Notes)     29 min,  0.48 hours ( 1.8%) > Reviews                   215 min,  3.58 hours (13.5%) > === Totals === > 1593 min, 26.55 hours, 3.79 hours per day > > > _______________________________________________ > Maildev mailing list > Maildev@lists.thunderbird.net > http://lists.thunderbird.net/mailman/listinfo/maildev_lists.thunderbird.net

Read them. Anyway, I'm not sure how these complaints of slow reviews really "fit" in the reports. I understand slow reviews are annoying (yes they are!), but it's just a slow review, it doesn't block "progress" in the greater sense. Can't say for the others, but for bug 1320191 it's a typical case of a workaround for what is basically a server bug in a complicated area. So it's really hard to judge if it's the right way to go about it. It requires a bunch of time to figure that out. The patch will of course hide the bug for a particular case, but that doesn't necessarily mean it is correct in general.  -Magnus On 12-10-2017 00:36, Jörg Knobloch wrote: > *Obstacles and impediments:* > Slow reviews as noted below, *twelve *and *nine *weeks delay so far (does > anyone read the reports or are they just ignored?)

I think they do fit. Part of the report is to determine what blocking factors are, and if this is something Jörg feels blocks his progress then that is totally valid. Of course you could argue that only some bugs are actually blocking progress, so it would be more important to mention if a bustage fix requires a review that is not being taken care of, but if slow reviews for a long term bugfix is really the only obstacle, I think that is generally a good state. Philipp On 10/16/17 9:23 AM, Magnus Melin wrote: > > Read them. > > Anyway, I'm not sure how these complaints of slow reviews really "fit" > in the reports. I understand slow reviews are annoying (yes they > are!), but it's just a slow review, it doesn't block "progress" in the > greater sense. Can't say for the others, but for bug 1320191 it's a > typical case of a workaround for what is basically a server bug in a > complicated area. So it's really hard to judge if it's the right way > to go about it. It requires a bunch of time to figure that out. The > patch will of course hide the bug for a particular case, but that > doesn't necessarily mean it is correct in general. > >  -Magnus > > On 12-10-2017 00:36, Jörg Knobloch wrote: >> *Obstacles and impediments:* >> Slow reviews as noted below, *twelve *and *nine *weeks delay so far >> (does anyone read the reports or are they just ignored?) > > > _______________________________________________ > Maildev mailing list > Maildev@lists.thunderbird.net > http://lists.thunderbird.net/mailman/listinfo/maildev_lists.thunderbird.net

I concur with Philipp. In Agile, you state: What you worked on, what you plan to work on, and what your blockers and obstacles are. Reviews are always obstacles of some sort. If they take a long time and hinder progress, it's fair to mention that in the report. That said, in this case, I concur with Magnus that the bug and the fix is really difficult and needs care. I think a little time to think about what's the best solution here is a reasonable thing to do. At least Jörg now has his proof that the reports are being read. I think that's all he wanted to accomplish :-). Ben Philipp Kewisch wrote on 16.10.17 11:59: > I think they do fit. Part of the report is to determine what blocking > factors are, and if this is something Jörg feels blocks his progress > then that is totally valid. Of course you could argue that only some > bugs are actually blocking progress, so it would be more important to > mention if a bustage fix requires a review that is not being taken > care of, but if slow reviews for a long term bugfix is really the only > obstacle, I think that is generally a good state. > > Philipp > > On 10/16/17 9:23 AM, Magnus Melin wrote: >> >> Read them. >> >> Anyway, I'm not sure how these complaints of slow reviews really >> "fit" in the reports. I understand slow reviews are annoying (yes >> they are!), but it's just a slow review, it doesn't block "progress" >> in the greater sense. Can't say for the others, but for bug 1320191 >> it's a typical case of a workaround for what is basically a server >> bug in a complicated area. So it's really hard to judge if it's the >> right way to go about it. It requires a bunch of time to figure that >> out. The patch will of course hide the bug for a particular case, but >> that doesn't necessarily mean it is correct in general. >> >>  -Magnus >> >> On 12-10-2017 00:36, Jörg Knobloch wrote: >>> *Obstacles and impediments:* >>> Slow reviews as noted below, *twelve *and *nine *weeks delay so far >>> (does anyone read the reports or are they just ignored?) >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Maildev mailing list >> Maildev@lists.thunderbird.net >> http://lists.thunderbird.net/mailman/listinfo/maildev_lists.thunderbird.net > > > > _______________________________________________ > Maildev mailing list > Maildev@lists.thunderbird.net > http://lists.thunderbird.net/mailman/listinfo/maildev_lists.thunderbird.net