QA (public) » openQA Project (public)

Gave the answer already in chat, can copy here:
openqa-review is called with parameters from https://github.com/os-autoinst/openqa_review/blob/master/bin/openqa-review-daily-email#L12 , that is --host ${openqa_host} -n -r -T --query-issue-status --no-empty-sections --include-softfails --running-threshold=2 --exclude-job-groups ^(Released|Development|old)

https://github.com/os-autoinst/openqa_review/pull/150

merged. New SR created: https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/901745

When I wanted to review Dominik's PR yesterday, I found a similar issue, but on the o3 page:
https://w3.nue.suse.com/~okurz/openqa_opensuse_org_status.html#unassigned_box
Under OpenSUSE Tumbleweed you can find:

Arch: x86_64 Status: Red

Existing Product bugs:

soft fails: upgrade_Leap_42.1_kde -> boo1007701
soft fails: extra_tests_on_xfce -> bsc981596
extra_tests_textmode_containers, jeos-containers@64bit_virtio -> gh#containers/podman#10685

And if you go to the bsc981596 link:
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=981596

you will see that the bug is assigned.

I found out it has to do with the matching (bsc vs. bsc#).
Should I create another ticket for this?

Actually if people fail to follow the convention don't clean up after them, raise it as an error within the generated report

The existing regex allows bugrefs without a hash:

bugref_regex = "(poo|boo|bsc|bgo)#?([0-9]+)"

And bugrefs eg. in needles can't have a hash.

The problem is that the openqa_review Issue class is dealing with them inconsistently.

I wonder who introduced that inconsistency :D