Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Please Document Launchpad Release Tags and Their Semantics #123

Open
holmanb opened this issue May 27, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

Please Document Launchpad Release Tags and Their Semantics #123

holmanb opened this issue May 27, 2024 · 4 comments

Comments

@holmanb
Copy link
Member

holmanb commented May 27, 2024

Deb package release process make use of Launchpad tags (ex: verification-needed) to communicate the current state of a proposed change on Launchpad. Example:

tags: 	added: verification-failed verification-failed-noble
removed: verification-needed verification-needed-noble
tags: 	added: regression-proposed 

These don't appear to have reference documentation anywhere, yet these tags drive processes across teams and projects and have agreed-upon meanings. It is obvious what these tags mean to some. For new or infrequent contributors, a lack of documentation forces a dependency on others to contribute.

As a start, I propose that we add a reference page which defines these terms. Once that is done, a flow graph would be very convenient to help external individuals quickly understand work that needs to happen and its current state.

@holmanb holmanb changed the title Please Document Launchpad Tags and Their Semantics Please Document Launchpad Release Tags and Their Semantics May 27, 2024
@panlinux
Copy link

FWIW, the verification-* tags are documented in the ubuntu SRU page at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates

@basak
Copy link

basak commented May 27, 2024 via email

@bryceharrington
Copy link
Member

There is also https://dev.launchpad.net/LaunchpadBugTags for the officially accepted ones.

@cpaelzer
Copy link
Collaborator

Since this is a pure SRU-process thing and it now has better-than-wiki docs - with code and bug tracking in the project - should this request move there if considered not sufficiently explained?.

AFAICS there we have these two right now:

So report there and close it here then?
@holmanb WDYT?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants