Project

General

Profile

action #35760

coordination #34138: [functional][u][epic][eternal] work on any issue from http://github.com/os-autoinst/openqa_review/issues/

[functional][u][medium] work on any issue from http://github.com/okurz/openqa_review/issues/

Added by okurz over 4 years ago. Updated about 4 years ago.

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Category:
Enhancement to existing tests
Target version:
SUSE QA - Milestone 18
Start date:
2018-05-02
Due date:
2018-07-31
% Done:

0%

Estimated time:
2.00 h
Difficulty:

Description

Acceptance criteria

  • AC1: at least one issue from openqa-review is resolved by [u]-team

Tasks

T1: * work on https://github.com/okurz/openqa_review/issues/85
T2: * work on https://github.com/okurz/openqa_review/issues/78

T3: * Refactor the openqa-review code to not use "Issue" object for the messages that does not have a valid bugref.

useful links


Related issues

Related to openQA Tests - action #38957: [functional] Refactor the openqa-review code to not use "Issue" object for the messages that does not have a valid bugref.Rejected2018-07-31

Copied from openQA Tests - action #35758: [functional][y][medium] Handle "boo#0" not as error in log but better in openqa_reviewResolved2018-05-022018-05-22

History

#1 Updated by okurz over 4 years ago

  • Copied from action #35758: [functional][y][medium] Handle "boo#0" not as error in log but better in openqa_review added

#2 Updated by okurz over 4 years ago

  • Status changed from New to Workable

#3 Updated by SLindoMansilla about 4 years ago

  • Due date changed from 2018-06-05 to 2018-06-19

Please look for a specific issue so we can estimate properly

#4 Updated by okurz about 4 years ago

  • Due date changed from 2018-06-19 to 2018-06-05

You, I do not want to spoon-feed you. I am open for you to pick up any issue but if you really can not decide on your own, pick https://github.com/okurz/openqa_review/issues/85 which I saw multiple times recently in the daily generated reports.

#5 Updated by mgriessmeier about 4 years ago

  • Due date changed from 2018-06-05 to 2018-06-19

#6 Updated by mgriessmeier about 4 years ago

  • Subject changed from [functional][u] work on any issue from http://github.com/okurz/openqa_review/issues/ to [functional][u][medium] work on any issue from http://github.com/okurz/openqa_review/issues/
  • Description updated (diff)

#7 Updated by oorlov about 4 years ago

  • Assignee set to oorlov

#8 Updated by oorlov about 4 years ago

  • Status changed from Workable to In Progress

#9 Updated by okurz about 4 years ago

  • Target version changed from Milestone 16 to Milestone 17

#10 Updated by oorlov about 4 years ago

I've added PR, that fixes issue#76

Waiting for review.

PR: https://github.com/okurz/openqa_review/pull/87

#11 Updated by oorlov about 4 years ago

  • Status changed from In Progress to Feedback

#12 Updated by oorlov about 4 years ago

  • Description updated (diff)

#13 Updated by oorlov about 4 years ago

My latest changes caused an issue when openqa_report with 'query_issue_status' parameter was executed against openQA issue with invalid bugref. bugid was not initialized and it caused AttributeError while calling 'self.bugid == 0' in 'Issue' object initialization.

I've fixed this with PR: https://github.com/okurz/openqa_review/pull/89

I'll keep this ticket in 'Feedback' for a while, just to be sure that all the cases covered and new issues are not appear.

#14 Updated by oorlov about 4 years ago

Observation: When openQA issue does not have a valid bugref, it is added as 'product' issue. Reminder comment script goes through the 'product' issues and looks for a last comment. It will fail on assertion if issue type is not 'bugzilla'.

Fix: https://github.com/okurz/openqa_review/pull/92
The commit resolves the issue by skipping 'product' issues with invalid issue type.

#15 Updated by okurz about 4 years ago

  • Target version changed from Milestone 17 to Milestone 17

#16 Updated by mgriessmeier about 4 years ago

PR is merged - can we resolve it? oorlov?

#17 Updated by oorlov about 4 years ago

  • Description updated (diff)
  • Status changed from Feedback to In Progress

I want to continue working on this ticket, on T3.

#18 Updated by mgriessmeier about 4 years ago

  • Due date changed from 2018-06-19 to 2018-07-03

#19 Updated by mgriessmeier about 4 years ago

  • Due date changed from 2018-07-03 to 2018-07-31

#20 Updated by oorlov about 4 years ago

I did not have enough time during the sprint to look at this ticket.

#21 Updated by okurz about 4 years ago

Do you still plan to go further or should we close this ticket by now?

#22 Updated by mgriessmeier about 4 years ago

  • Estimated time set to 2.00 h

#23 Updated by okurz about 4 years ago

  • Target version changed from Milestone 17 to Milestone 18

#24 Updated by oorlov about 4 years ago

  • Status changed from In Progress to Feedback

Added ability to parse urls in soft-fail messages.

PR: https://github.com/okurz/openqa_review/pull/103

Regarding T3, after deeper investigation, I've came to conclusion that it is pretty hard to refactor current app to avoid using the Issue object just in case if there is no valid bugref in soft-fail message. The code was designed to use it everywhere. So, the time that I'll spend on this does not correlate with the benefit of the refactoring, in my opinion.

I'm suggesting to postpone it or even to just leave it as is until we'll not face real need in refactoring that.

#25 Updated by mgriessmeier about 4 years ago

oorlov wrote:

Added ability to parse urls in soft-fail messages.

PR: https://github.com/okurz/openqa_review/pull/103

Regarding T3, after deeper investigation, I've came to conclusion that it is pretty hard to refactor current app to avoid using the Issue object just in case if there is no valid bugref in soft-fail message. The code was designed to use it everywhere. So, the time that I'll spend on this does not correlate with the benefit of the refactoring, in my opinion.

I'm suggesting to postpone it or even to just leave it as is until we'll not face real need in refactoring that.

yup, please create a followup ticket for this refactoring task and resolve this one

#26 Updated by oorlov about 4 years ago

  • Status changed from Feedback to Resolved

#27 Updated by oorlov about 4 years ago

  • Related to action #38957: [functional] Refactor the openqa-review code to not use "Issue" object for the messages that does not have a valid bugref. added

Also available in: Atom PDF