Re: Bugs no longer autoclose?

[Jaap Keuter <jaap.keuter () xs4all nl>]

Hi,

Okay, thanks for looking that up, I couldn’t find it.

The most obvious hook would be change-merged, although getting to the Bug: tag in the commit message could be a 
challenge.

Doing this stuff manually is just a pain, this is stuff that computers are simply way better at, so we have to figure a 
way to make them do it.
But in the mean time, yes, developers which are merging changes, please check back at the bugs they address. 
And don’t worry if you forget, we’ll just have a bug squashing session at SharkFest EU to clean it up.

Thanks,
Jaap


> On 25 Aug 2017, at 17:31, Michael Mann via Wireshark-dev <wireshark-dev () wireshark org> wrote:
>
> This was briefly discussed on -core back in March (when you brought it up then).
>  
> Copy/pasted the comments from there (conversation between you and Gerald):
>  
> > > It looks like we've run into j2bugzilla issue:
> > >
> > > https://github.com/TomRK1089/j2bugzilla/issues/14 <https://github.com/TomRK1089/j2bugzilla/issues/14>
> >
> > That is unfortunate, but ...
> >
> > > It also looks like we're the only people on the planet trying to integrate Gerrit and Bugzilla.
> >
> > things like this makes this such a cool project to work on. :)
>  
> As an alternative to its-bugzilla we could ping and close bugs using hook scripts:
> https://code.wireshark.org/review/Documentation/config-hooks.html 
> <https://code.wireshark.org/review/Documentation/config-hooks.html>
> Anyone feel like writing (and debugging) a script?
>  
>  
>  
>  
> I've been trying to keep up "manually" with closing bugs (especially if I'm the one giving the +2 and submitting) 
> because I'm not a script writer, but until the issue is addressed, it would be appreciated if developers would close 
> their bugs once patches with Bug: XXXX tagline are submitted.
>  
>  
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jaap Keuter <jaap.keuter () xs4all nl>
> To: Developer support list for Wireshark <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
> Sent: Fri, Aug 25, 2017 11:17 am
> Subject: [Wireshark-dev] Bugs no longer autoclose?
>
> Hi, Could it be that Gerrit-Bugzilla interaction is partially broken wrt. bug status? e.g. bug 14004 has a change 
> uploaded and merged (as noted in the comments) but its status is still stuck at ‘UNCONFIRMED’. Even though it should 
> have been moved to “IN_PROGRESS”, now that the change is merged I would expect the bug to be “RESOLVED”/“FIXED”. Is 
> that a degradation between Gerrit and Bugzilla? Thanks, Jaap 
> ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list 
> <wireshark-dev () wireshark org <mailto:dev () wireshark org>> Archives: 
> https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev <https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev> Unsubscribe: 
> https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev <https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev> 
> mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe <mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark 
> org?subject=unsubscribe>___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
> Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe