Adding Issue Tracking Document and Issue Template #61
Conversation
|
@opensecuritycontroller/osc_triage test notification |
|
|
||
| ## Opening an Issue | ||
|
|
||
| Once a defect is found or you would like to suggest an improvement or start a discussion, the first step is to look at existing issues to see if it is already being tracked. If the issue is not being tracked, create a new one. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we point out to existing issues mark down doc or page ?. or like knowledge base.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is going to be really hard to keep up to date since every issue will have to be updated on the document. The issue section on github will be the most accurate and allows to filter by labels which should help narrow it down.
development/issue_tracking.md
Outdated
| * triage/re-evaluate | ||
|
|
||
| Assigned Priority | ||
| * priority/high |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we should have low, medium, high, and critical. ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can others confirm we want a fourth priority?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was checking other projects/tech articles. We can add fourth priority as well.
development/issue_tracking.md
Outdated
| Choose only **one** of the following label types: | ||
| * defect | ||
| * discussion | ||
| * improvement |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How do we label documentation bugs.. can we add one more label for that?.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The three label types are the three main namespaces. If you look at the actual labels on the osc-core repository (go to issues -> labels), it shows defect/documentation, defect/product-code, and defect/unit-test. The reason why this is shown with just the namespace is that not every individual label applies to all repositories, for example, defect/product-code does not apply to the community repo. I kept it minimal to just the namespaces to avoid confusion on specific labels being used in specific repos.
Also, thanks for the review!!!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a good point though, I will try to make it more clear that they are the base of each label.
|
Also, for reference, the following will be the issue_template.md for code repositories: Expected BehaviorActual BehaviorSteps to ReproduceAdditional Information (Optional)Status
|
hai1337
changed the title
ISSUE_TEMPLATE.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| **Document Location**: [PATH_TO_DOCUMENT](FULL_LINK) | ||
|
|
||
| [//]: # (DELETE THIS LINE: If the document exists, replace PATH_TO_DOCUMENT with the path to the document header for example, path/name.md#header and replace FULL_LINK with full link of the path to the document header. If you are proposing a new document, replace PATH_TO_DOCUMENT with the path to the document header of where it should go.) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you replace the current example with a link to a real document header within Community? Replace path/name.md... with a real one.
issue_tracking.md details both the triage and developer flows when it comes to tracking and resolving issues.
The ISSUE_TEMPLATE.md in this PR is related to this repo. There will be a similar one for osc.org with an additional section for the website. The code repo issue templates will be similar to normal defect info: expected behavior, actual behavior, steps to reproduce with the additional Status section.
Notice the labels added in each repository. The document repos contain slightly different labels, e.g., document repos will not have defect/product-code labels.
This issue addresses part of #51 by creating the template.