PEP 588 – GitHub Issues Migration Plan
- Mariatta <mariatta at python.org>
- Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org>
- Discourse thread
Table of Contents
- Migration Plan
- Hire a professional project manager
- Create a playground CPython issue tracker on GitHub
- Backup of GitHub data
- Update the CLA host
- Create “Python Triage” team on GitHub
- Create labels for issue triage
- Create issue templates
- Updates to bedevere
- Update the devguide
- Add a button in bpo to migrate the issue to GitHub
- Migrated issues
- Make bpo read-only
- Mapping between issues from bpo and GitHub
- Nosy-ing the expert
- Open issues
- Further questions and discussions
This PEP describes the detailed plan for migrating from Python’s issue tracker on Roundup to GitHub issues. See PEP 581 for rationale and background. PEP 588 also describes the detailed timeline for the migration.
Here we outline the tasks, steps, and core decisions we need to make in order to migrate bug tracking to GitHub, with the least impact on CPython developer productivity.
Hire a professional project manager
Having a professional project manager to handle the migration, similar to how the Warehouse project was managed, would help ensure the success of this project.
Create a playground CPython issue tracker on GitHub
We should create a playground issue tracker on GitHub where we can experiment and test out the new workflow.
Backup of GitHub data
This effort has been started and is being tracked as an issue in core-workflow . We’re using GitHub’s Migrations API  to download GitHub data for CPython on a daily basis. The archives will be dropped in a S3 bucket.
Thanks to Ee Durbin for working on this.
Update the CLA host
At the moment, the CLA is hosted within bpo. It needs to be updated such that signing the CLA does not require a bpo account, and it should be hosted outside of the bpo.
The current CLA process itself is not ideal. Currently, contributors to devguide, peps, and core-workflow need to sign a CLA, and it requires a bpo account. A bpo account should not be required for those projects.
There is an ongoing effort to start using our own instance of CLA assistant instead of the current CLA process in place. Discussion about this has been started in core-workflow mailing list as well as on Discourse.
This effort is currently stalled because cla-assistant does not yet support CLA signed on behalf of organization.
Create “Python Triage” team on GitHub
The bug triagers on bpo are valuable to the core Python workflow, and we definitely would need even more help with triaging issues on GitHub.
It has been proposed on Discourse for us to create a “bug triage” team on GitHub to help with closing issues, notifying the appropriate parties, as well as applying labels to issues and pull requests.
The new Triage role on GitHub is currently in beta, and the Python organization has been granted access to this role, and we can begin taking advantage of it.
The “Python Triage” team has been created. A description and expectations of the triage role have been added to Devguide.
Progress of this project can be tracked in “Adding Triagers” project board.
Create labels for issue triage
In bpo, we currently have the following fields for each issue:
We will create the corresponding labels:
type-behavior, type-crash, type-compile error, type-resource usage, ... components-2to3, components-argument clinic, components-asyncio, ... priority-release blocker, priority-deferred blocker, priority-critical, ...
In addition, we’ll create a
needs triage label.
The final “labels” to be created can be decided at a later time when it is time to start switching to GitHub issues.
A test repository containing all possible labels and color schema has been created by Carol Willing and can be reviewed at https://github.com/willingc/test-581/labels.
Create issue templates
We will create an issue template and add the following headers:
--- Type: behavior | crash | compile error | resource usage (choose one) Components: 2to3 | Argument Clinic | asyncio | Build | ... (can select more than one) Priority: release blocker | deferred blocker | critical | ... Needs backport to: 2.7 | 3.6 | 3.7 ---
The idea is to allow the issue creator to help us triage the issue. The above values are pre-filled in the template. The issue creator will remove texts that do not apply to their issue.
Based on the above headers, bedevere-bot can apply the necessary
labels to the issue. If the issue creator did not supply the above
headers, the bot will apply the
needs triage label. At that point,
it will require a core developer to properly label the issue.
We can also take advantage of GitHub’s multiple issue template feature, and the ability to automatically set issue assignee and labels by using issue templates.
Updates to bedevere
Bedevere-bot will need to be updated to recognize the issue headers described above and apply the proper labels.
Bedevere-bot can also copy over the labels to pull requests that correspond to the issue.
Update the devguide
Devguide should be updated with information about the new workflow of using GitHub issues. It can be done as a separate branch, and it should be done ahead of the migration, not after.
When an issue is marked as “moved”, this issue should be in read-only mode. bpo should forbid the edition of the issue.
Make bpo read-only
This should be the final step. Once we start using GitHub issues, make bpo read-only, instead of shutting it down. Do not accept new registrations. Do not allow comments or issues to be created.
Mapping between issues from bpo and GitHub
Usually when we reference an issue from bpo, we use bpo-XYZ but with
Github, we will have a new reference with this format
Because we will migrate the issues from bpo to GitHub, we need to have a new field on bpo for the reference to the issues on GitHub, and the same thing on Github for the ‘eventual’ reference from bpo.
For GitHub, we need to add
For bpo, add a new field
Nosy-ing the expert
A current functionality in bpo is to automatically nosy people who are listed as an expert of certain area. Several Python core developers have expressed that they prefer not having to subscribe to everything on GitHub, but only getting notified for issues related to their area of interest and expertise.
To help with this situation, we can develop a bot that can notify people
whenever an issue has been categorized using labels. For example, when an issue
was labeled with
area-windows, the windows experts can be notified.
The notification can be in the form of email notification, or @-mention on GitHub.
A GitHub account should not be a requirement
Back when moving the CPython codebase from Mercurial to GitHub was being discussed  , it was brought up that we still needed to allow uploading of patches on bpo, and that a GitHub account should not be a requirement in order to contribute to Python.
If bpo is made read-only, we’ll need to come up with a different solution to allow people to contribute when they don’t have a GitHub account.
One solution is to create a new “python-issues” mailing list, similar to the firstname.lastname@example.org  mailing list, to allow people to submit their issues there.
Related to this, since the migration to GitHub in 2017, I recall one case  where there was a contributor, who submitted a patch to Mercurial and refused to create a GitHub account. Because of this, our bot was unable to detect whether they had signed the CLA. Another person had volunteered to upload their patch to GitHub. But it was still required that both people sign the CLA.
That particular situation was complicated. It took up five core developers’ time to investigate and manually check the CLA, causing confusion.
Trim off the “Components” list
Is the current “components” list still making sense and relevant? Can the list be shortened?
Is the current “priority” list useful? Nick Coghlan noted that perhaps only
release blocker and
deferred blocker are useful.
Further questions and discussions
You can post questions on Discourse under the Core-Workflow category.
Thanks to Guido van Rossum, Brett Cannon, and Nick Coghlan, who were consulted in the early stage and research of this PEP. Their feedback, concerns, input, and ideas have been valuable.
This document has been placed in the public domain.
Last modified: 2022-04-20 09:53:08 GMT