code review mail and page show bugs currently related to the branch rather than bugs relevant to the merge proposal (e.g. fixed bugs are reported)
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Launchpad itself |
Triaged
|
High
|
Unassigned |
Bug Description
Symptoms
========
Merge proposals like https:/
Analysis
========
The data model does not link bugs to merge proposals, or even to revisions - it maps bugs to branches. So there isn't a graph or time based relationship that can be used to determine appropriate bugs.
BranchMergeProp
'Implies that these bugs would be fixed, in the target, by the merge.'
But the data model and implementation do not match that docstring.
Solutions
=========
A heuristic of only showing open bugs would help for current merge proposals, but old merge proposals would still have their bug links changed (because they would either show no bugs (all closed) or unrelated new bugs, or if we showed closed bugs on merged proposals, they would show bugs from the other serial proposals of that branch.
One thing that would work is to capture a direct bug (or even task) relationship against the merge proposal. While the merge proposal is unmerged and picking up new revisions from the branch, we could automatically add more bugs to the merge proposal, and when it actually lands, freeze the set of bugs. This would mean that after merging, someone adding a bug-branch link would no longer have that link show up on the merged proposals, but this is perhaps easier to understand.
summary: |
- code review mail shouldn't mention already-merged bugs + code review mail shouldn't mention fix released bugs |
summary: |
- code review mail shouldn't mention fix released bugs + code review mail and page shouldn't mention fix released bugs |
Changed in launchpad-foundations: | |
milestone: | 10.03 → none |
Changed in launchpad: | |
importance: | Low → High |
summary: |
- code review mail and page shouldn't mention fix released bugs + code review mail and page show bugs currently related to the branch + rather than bugs relevant to the merge proposal (e.g. fixed bugs are + reported) |
description: | updated |
description: | updated |
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 13:30:27 Martin Pool wrote: /code.edge. launchpad. net/~mbp/ bzr/trivial/ +merge/ 15909 this
> Public bug reported:
>
> In a case like
> https:/
> branch has previously been merged to fix bug 463099. I'm now reusing
> that trivial branch to do something else.
>
> However, both the web page and the review mail still mention the
> irrelevant bug 463099.
>
> Maybe they should only mention bugs fixed in the proposed branch and not
> in the target, or alternatively only bugs fixed in the unmerged
> revisions.
The problem with this is that bugs are linked to branches, not revisions.
Launchpad can't know that you are reusing a branch for a different reason.
status triaged
importance low