Page MenuHomePhabricator

Add "Work in progress" button/status to Gerrit workflow to reduce dashboard noise
Closed, DeclinedPublic

Description

On openracks Gerrit, they have a "Work in Progress" button. I'm not 100% sure the workflow, but I think we should have a "Work in progress" button as well.

Obligatory screenshot: http://i.imgur.com/M8XXMPu.png


Version: unspecified
Severity: enhancement

Details

Reference
bz50842

Event Timeline

bzimport raised the priority of this task from to Needs Triage.Nov 22 2014, 1:50 AM
bzimport added a project: Gerrit.
bzimport set Reference to bz50842.
bzimport added a subscriber: Unknown Object (MLST).

I am all for new, shiny buttons—yay buttons!—but what problem does the
"Work in Progress"-button solve, or is there a use case?

Just to have that here as well, and I'll forget otherwise:
Coincidently, just yesterday someone from openstack started a discussion in
Gerrit about their WiP button. There seems to be a related upstream change,

https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/#/c/36091/1

which openstack wants to get into upstream. Upstream does not like that change,
and suggests to use labels instead.

(2013-07-06 ~16:31–20:40 UTC. Logs on

http://echelog.com/logs/browse/gerrit/1372975200

does not show that part yet.)

(In reply to comment #1)

I am all for new, shiny buttons—yay buttons!—but what problem does the
"Work in Progress"-button solve, or is there a use case?

Wild guess, But probably marks it to prevent merging or something.

New feature => "enhancement" severity

If memory serves, it relies on some hacks to their code that haven't made it into upstream. There was some discussion upstream awhile back, but I remember nobody being particularly interested in seeing it through.

I'm going to wontfix, social conventions work just fine here. If you don't want something to merge, provide a negative review of sorts or indicate it in the commit message.

(In reply to comment #1)

I am all for new, shiny buttons—yay buttons!—but what problem does the
"Work in Progress"-button solve, or is there a use case?

I'm not sure about a button, but the underlying goal here is to prevent dashboards/queues from the added noise of "draft changes"/"[WIP]" changes.

Re-opening this for further consideration with a clarified bug summary.

Created attachment 13039
Screenshot from http://i.imgur.com/M8XXMPu.png

Please upload screenshots and other bug-related media to Bugzilla as attachments. imgur auto-prunes; Bugzilla does not. :-)

Attached:

M8XXMPu.png (344×1 px, 50 KB)

hashar claimed this task.
hashar added a subscriber: hashar.

OpenStack has abandoned the Work in progress button. They went with a new label 'Workflow' where +1 is for approval and -1 is for a WIP. So one can filter out any patches having a workflow score of -1.

scfc claimed this task.
scfc set Security to None.

How do I submit a change for review to All-Projects? I tried refs/for/master ("branch master not found"), refs/for/meta/config ("branch meta/config not found") and refs/for/refs/meta/config ("Invalid project configuration: project.config: group 'Change Owner' not in groups"). It must be doable as https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/q/project:All-Projects,n,z shows.

Ah, the last one might even be a hint: The change I was trying to submit has a syntax error because "Change Owner" in "label-WIP = -1..+0 group Change Owner" perhaps does not exist in Gerrit 2.8.1?

@scfc if you think adding a new label to Gerrit is an idea, we would want to discuss it on wikitech. It is easier to discuss about it compared to a Gerrit change. If there is consensus we can fill in a task and associated sub tasks.

Meanwhile reclosing since the original request (add a WIP button) is not going to be added.

https://gerrit-documentation.storage.googleapis.com/Documentation/2.8.1/access-control.html lists as "System Groups" "Administrators", "Anonymous Users", "Non-Interactive Users", "Project Owners" and "Registered Users". https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/access-control.html instead lists "Anonymous Users", "Project Owners", "Change Owner" and "Registered Users". So this might be indeed a syntax 2.8.1 doesn't understand.