478 lines
23 KiB
Markdown
478 lines
23 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
type: reference, dev
|
|
stage: none
|
|
group: Development
|
|
info: To determine the technical writer assigned to the Stage/Group associated with this page, see https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/ux/technical-writing/#designated-technical-writers
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Issues workflow
|
|
|
|
## Issue tracker guidelines
|
|
|
|
**[Search the issue tracker](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues)** for similar entries before
|
|
submitting your own, there's a good chance somebody else had the same issue or
|
|
feature proposal. Show your support with an award emoji and/or join the
|
|
discussion.
|
|
|
|
Please submit bugs using the ['Bug' issue template](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/blob/master/.gitlab/issue_templates/Bug.md) provided on the issue tracker.
|
|
The text in the parenthesis is there to help you with what to include. Omit it
|
|
when submitting the actual issue. You can copy-paste it and then edit as you
|
|
see fit.
|
|
|
|
## Issue triaging
|
|
|
|
Our issue triage policies are [described in our handbook](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/quality/issue-triage/).
|
|
You are very welcome to help the GitLab team triage issues.
|
|
We also organize [issue bash events](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/issues/17815)
|
|
once every quarter.
|
|
|
|
The most important thing is making sure valid issues receive feedback from the
|
|
development team. Therefore the priority is mentioning developers that can help
|
|
on those issues. Please select someone with relevant experience from the
|
|
[GitLab team](https://about.gitlab.com/company/team/).
|
|
If there is nobody mentioned with that expertise look in the commit history for
|
|
the affected files to find someone.
|
|
|
|
We also use [GitLab Triage](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-triage) to automate
|
|
some triaging policies. This is currently set up as a scheduled pipeline
|
|
(`https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/quality/triage-ops/pipeline_schedules/10512/editpipeline_schedules/10512/edit`,
|
|
must have at least Developer access to the project) running on [quality/triage-ops](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/quality/triage-ops)
|
|
project.
|
|
|
|
## Labels
|
|
|
|
To allow for asynchronous issue handling, we use [milestones](https://gitlab.com/groups/gitlab-org/-/milestones)
|
|
and [labels](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/labels). Leads and product managers handle most of the
|
|
scheduling into milestones. Labeling is a task for everyone. (For some projects, labels can be set only by GitLab team members and not by community contributors).
|
|
|
|
Most issues will have labels for at least one of the following:
|
|
|
|
- Type: `~feature`, `~bug`, `~tooling`, `~documentation`, etc.
|
|
- Stage: `~"devops::plan"`, `~"devops::create"`, etc.
|
|
- Group: `~"group::source code"`, `~"group::knowledge"`, `~"group::editor"`, etc.
|
|
- Category: `~"Category:Code Analytics"`, `~"Category:DevOps Reports"`, `~"Category:Templates"`, etc.
|
|
- Feature: `~wiki`, `~ldap`, `~api`, `~issues`, `~"merge requests"`, etc.
|
|
- Department: `~UX`, `~Quality`
|
|
- Team: `~"Technical Writing"`, `~Delivery`
|
|
- Specialization: `~frontend`, `~backend`, `~documentation`
|
|
- Release Scoping: `~Deliverable`, `~Stretch`, `~"Next Patch Release"`
|
|
- Priority: `~"priority::1"`, `~"priority::2"`, `~"priority::3"`, `~"priority::4"`
|
|
- Severity: ~`"severity::1"`, `~"severity::2"`, `~"severity::3"`, `~"severity::4"`
|
|
|
|
All labels, their meaning and priority are defined on the
|
|
[labels page](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/labels).
|
|
|
|
If you come across an issue that has none of these, and you're allowed to set
|
|
labels, you can _always_ add the type, stage, group, and often the category/feature labels.
|
|
|
|
### Type labels
|
|
|
|
Type labels are very important. They define what kind of issue this is. Every
|
|
issue should have one and only one.
|
|
|
|
The current type labels are:
|
|
|
|
- ~feature
|
|
- ~bug
|
|
- ~tooling
|
|
- ~"support request"
|
|
- ~meta
|
|
- ~documentation
|
|
|
|
A number of type labels have a priority assigned to them, which automatically
|
|
makes them float to the top, depending on their importance.
|
|
|
|
Type labels are always lowercase, and can have any color, besides blue (which is
|
|
already reserved for category labels).
|
|
|
|
The descriptions on the [labels page](https://gitlab.com/groups/gitlab-org/-/labels)
|
|
explain what falls under each type label.
|
|
|
|
The GitLab handbook documents [when something is a bug](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/product/product-processes/#bug-issues) and [when it is a feature request](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/product/product-processes/#feature-issues).
|
|
|
|
### Stage labels
|
|
|
|
Stage labels specify which [stage](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/product/product-categories/#hierarchy) the issue belongs to.
|
|
|
|
#### Naming and color convention
|
|
|
|
Stage labels respects the `devops::<stage_key>` naming convention.
|
|
`<stage_key>` is the stage key as it is in the single source of truth for stages at
|
|
<https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/blob/master/data/stages.yml>
|
|
with `_` replaced with a space.
|
|
|
|
For instance, the "Manage" stage is represented by the `~"devops::manage"` label in
|
|
the `gitlab-org` group since its key under `stages` is `manage`.
|
|
|
|
The current stage labels can be found by [searching the labels list for `devops::`](https://gitlab.com/groups/gitlab-org/-/labels?search=devops::).
|
|
|
|
These labels are [scoped labels](../../user/project/labels.md#scoped-labels)
|
|
and thus are mutually exclusive.
|
|
|
|
The Stage labels are used to generate the [direction pages](https://about.gitlab.com/direction/) automatically.
|
|
|
|
### Group labels
|
|
|
|
Group labels specify which [groups](https://about.gitlab.com/company/team/structure/#product-groups) the issue belongs to.
|
|
|
|
It's highly recommended to add a group label, as it's used by our triage
|
|
automation to
|
|
[infer the correct stage label](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/quality/triage-operations/#auto-labelling-of-issues).
|
|
|
|
#### Naming and color convention
|
|
|
|
Group labels respects the `group::<group_key>` naming convention and
|
|
their color is `#A8D695`.
|
|
`<group_key>` is the group key as it is in the single source of truth for groups at
|
|
<https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/blob/master/data/stages.yml>,
|
|
with `_` replaced with a space.
|
|
|
|
For instance, the "Continuous Integration" group is represented by the
|
|
~"group::continuous integration" label in the `gitlab-org` group since its key
|
|
under `stages.manage.groups` is `continuous_integration`.
|
|
|
|
The current group labels can be found by [searching the labels list for `group::`](https://gitlab.com/groups/gitlab-org/-/labels?search=group::).
|
|
|
|
These labels are [scoped labels](../../user/project/labels.md#scoped-labels)
|
|
and thus are mutually exclusive.
|
|
|
|
You can find the groups listed in the [Product Stages, Groups, and Categories](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/product/product-categories/) page.
|
|
|
|
We use the term group to map down product requirements from our product stages.
|
|
As a team needs some way to collect the work their members are planning to be assigned to, we use the `~group::` labels to do so.
|
|
|
|
Normally there is a 1:1 relationship between Stage labels and Group labels. In
|
|
the spirit of "Everyone can contribute", any issue can be picked up by any group,
|
|
depending on current priorities. When picking up an issue belonging to a different
|
|
group, it should be relabeled. For example, if an issue labeled `~"devops::create"`
|
|
and `~"group::knowledge"` is picked up by someone in the Access group of the Plan stage,
|
|
the issue should be relabeled as `~"group::access"` while keeping the original
|
|
`~"devops::create"` unchanged.
|
|
|
|
We also use stage and group labels to help quantify our [throughput](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/management/throughput/).
|
|
Please read [Stage and Group labels in Throughput](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/management/throughput/#stage-and-group-labels-in-throughput) for more information on how the labels are used in this context.
|
|
|
|
### Category labels
|
|
|
|
From the handbook's
|
|
[Product stages, groups, and categories](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/product/product-categories/#hierarchy)
|
|
page:
|
|
|
|
> Categories are high-level capabilities that may be a standalone product at
|
|
another company. e.g. Portfolio Management.
|
|
|
|
It's highly recommended to add a category label, as it's used by our triage
|
|
automation to
|
|
[infer the correct group and stage labels](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/quality/triage-operations/#auto-labelling-of-issues).
|
|
|
|
If you are an expert in a particular area, it makes it easier to find issues to
|
|
work on. You can also subscribe to those labels to receive an email each time an
|
|
issue is labeled with a category label corresponding to your expertise.
|
|
|
|
#### Naming and color convention
|
|
|
|
Category labels respects the `Category:<Category Name>` naming convention and
|
|
their color is `#428BCA`.
|
|
`<Category Name>` is the category name as it is in the single source of truth for categories at
|
|
<https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/blob/master/data/categories.yml>.
|
|
|
|
For instance, the "DevOps Report" category is represented by the
|
|
~"Category:DevOps Reports" label in the `gitlab-org` group since its
|
|
`devops_reports.name` value is "DevOps Reports".
|
|
|
|
If a category's label doesn't respect this naming convention, it should be specified
|
|
with [the `label` attribute](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/website/#category-attributes)
|
|
in <https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/blob/master/data/categories.yml>.
|
|
|
|
### Feature labels
|
|
|
|
From the handbook's
|
|
[Product stages, groups, and categories](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/product/product-categories/#hierarchy)
|
|
page:
|
|
|
|
> Features: Small, discrete functionalities. e.g. Issue weights. Some common
|
|
features are listed within parentheses to facilitate finding responsible PMs by keyword.
|
|
|
|
It's highly recommended to add a feature label if no category label applies, as
|
|
it's used by our triage automation to
|
|
[infer the correct group and stage labels](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/quality/triage-operations/#auto-labelling-of-issues).
|
|
|
|
If you are an expert in a particular area, it makes it easier to find issues to
|
|
work on. You can also subscribe to those labels to receive an email each time an
|
|
issue is labeled with a feature label corresponding to your expertise.
|
|
|
|
Examples of feature labels are `~wiki`, `~ldap`, `~api`, `~issues`, `~"merge requests"` etc.
|
|
|
|
#### Naming and color convention
|
|
|
|
Feature labels are all-lowercase.
|
|
|
|
### Facet labels
|
|
|
|
To track additional information or context about created issues, developers may
|
|
add _facet labels_. Facet labels are also sometimes used for issue prioritization
|
|
or for measurements (such as time to close). An example of a facet label is the
|
|
~customer label, which indicates customer interest.
|
|
|
|
### Department labels
|
|
|
|
The current department labels are:
|
|
|
|
- ~UX
|
|
- ~Quality
|
|
|
|
### Team labels
|
|
|
|
**Important**: Most of the historical team labels (e.g. Manage, Plan etc.) are
|
|
now deprecated in favor of [Group labels](#group-labels) and [Stage labels](#stage-labels).
|
|
|
|
Team labels specify what team is responsible for this issue.
|
|
Assigning a team label makes sure issues get the attention of the appropriate
|
|
people.
|
|
|
|
The current team labels are:
|
|
|
|
- ~Delivery
|
|
- ~"Technical Writing"
|
|
|
|
#### Naming and color convention
|
|
|
|
Team labels are always capitalized so that they show up as the first label for
|
|
any issue.
|
|
|
|
### Specialization labels
|
|
|
|
These labels narrow the [specialization](https://about.gitlab.com/company/team/structure/#specialist) on a unit of work.
|
|
|
|
- ~frontend
|
|
- ~backend
|
|
- ~documentation
|
|
|
|
### Release scoping labels
|
|
|
|
Release Scoping labels help us clearly communicate expectations of the work for the
|
|
release. There are three levels of Release Scoping labels:
|
|
|
|
- ~Deliverable: Issues that are expected to be delivered in the current
|
|
milestone.
|
|
- ~Stretch: Issues that are a stretch goal for delivering in the current
|
|
milestone. If these issues are not done in the current release, they will
|
|
strongly be considered for the next release.
|
|
- ~"Next Patch Release": Issues to put in the next patch release. Work on these
|
|
first, and add the `~"Pick into X.Y"` label to the merge request, along with the
|
|
appropriate milestone.
|
|
|
|
Each issue scheduled for the current milestone should be labeled ~Deliverable
|
|
or ~"Stretch". Any open issue for a previous milestone should be labeled
|
|
~"Next Patch Release", or otherwise rescheduled to a different milestone.
|
|
|
|
### Priority labels
|
|
|
|
We have the following priority labels:
|
|
|
|
- ~"priority::1"
|
|
- ~"priority::2"
|
|
- ~"priority::3"
|
|
- ~"priority::4"
|
|
|
|
Please refer to the issue triage [priority label](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/quality/issue-triage/#priority) section in our handbook to see how it's used.
|
|
|
|
### Severity labels
|
|
|
|
We have the following severity labels:
|
|
|
|
- ~"severity::1"
|
|
- ~"severity::2"
|
|
- ~"severity::3"
|
|
- ~"severity::4"
|
|
|
|
Please refer to the issue triage [severity label](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/quality/issue-triage/#severity) section in our handbook to see how it's used.
|
|
|
|
### Label for community contributors
|
|
|
|
Issues that are beneficial to our users, 'nice to haves', that we currently do
|
|
not have the capacity for or want to give the priority to, are labeled as
|
|
~"Accepting merge requests", so the community can make a contribution.
|
|
|
|
Community contributors can submit merge requests for any issue they want, but
|
|
the ~"Accepting merge requests" label has a special meaning. It points to
|
|
changes that:
|
|
|
|
1. We already agreed on,
|
|
1. Are well-defined,
|
|
1. Are likely to get accepted by a maintainer.
|
|
|
|
We want to avoid a situation when a contributor picks an
|
|
~"Accepting merge requests" issue and then their merge request gets closed,
|
|
because we realize that it does not fit our vision, or we want to solve it in a
|
|
different way.
|
|
|
|
We automatically add the ~"Accepting merge requests" label to issues
|
|
that match the [triage policy](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/quality/triage-operations/#accepting-merge-requests).
|
|
|
|
We recommend people that have never contributed to any open source project to
|
|
look for issues labeled `~"Accepting merge requests"` with a [weight of 1](https://gitlab.com/groups/gitlab-org/-/issues?state=opened&label_name[]=Accepting+merge+requests&assignee_id=None&sort=weight&weight=1) or the `~"Good for 1st time contributors"` [label](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues?scope=all&utf8=%E2%9C%93&state=opened&label_name[]=Good%20for%201st%20time%20contributors&assignee_id=None) attached to it.
|
|
More experienced contributors are very welcome to tackle
|
|
[any of them](https://gitlab.com/groups/gitlab-org/-/issues?state=opened&label_name[]=Accepting+merge+requests&assignee_id=None).
|
|
|
|
For more complex features that have a weight of 2 or more and clear scope, we recommend looking at issues
|
|
with the [label `~"Community Challenge"`](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues?scope=all&utf8=%E2%9C%93&state=opened&label_name[]=Accepting%20merge%20requests&label_name[]=Community%20challenge).
|
|
If your MR for the `~"Community Challenge"` issue gets merged, you will also have a chance to win a custom
|
|
GitLab merchandise.
|
|
|
|
If you've decided that you would like to work on an issue, please @-mention
|
|
the [appropriate product manager](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/product/#who-to-talk-to-for-what)
|
|
as soon as possible. The product manager will then pull in appropriate GitLab team
|
|
members to further discuss scope, design, and technical considerations. This will
|
|
ensure that your contribution is aligned with the GitLab product and minimize
|
|
any rework and delay in getting it merged into master.
|
|
|
|
GitLab team members who apply the ~"Accepting merge requests" label to an issue
|
|
should update the issue description with a responsible product manager, inviting
|
|
any potential community contributor to @-mention per above.
|
|
|
|
### Stewardship label
|
|
|
|
For issues related to the open source stewardship of GitLab,
|
|
there is the ~"stewardship" label.
|
|
|
|
This label is to be used for issues in which the stewardship of GitLab
|
|
is a topic of discussion. For instance if GitLab Inc. is planning to add
|
|
features from GitLab EE to GitLab CE, related issues would be labeled with
|
|
~"stewardship".
|
|
|
|
A recent example of this was the issue for
|
|
[bringing the time tracking API to GitLab CE](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/issues/25517#note_20019084).
|
|
|
|
## Feature proposals
|
|
|
|
To create a feature proposal, open an issue on the
|
|
[issue tracker](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues).
|
|
|
|
In order to help track the feature proposals, we have created a
|
|
[`feature`](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues?label_name=feature) label. For the time being, users that are not members
|
|
of the project cannot add labels. You can instead ask one of the [core team](https://about.gitlab.com/community/core-team/)
|
|
members to add the label ~feature to the issue or add the following
|
|
code snippet right after your description in a new line: `~feature`.
|
|
|
|
Please keep feature proposals as small and simple as possible, complex ones
|
|
might be edited to make them small and simple.
|
|
|
|
Please submit Feature Proposals using the ['Feature Proposal' issue template](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/blob/master/.gitlab/issue_templates/Feature%20proposal.md) provided on the issue tracker.
|
|
|
|
For changes in the interface, it is helpful to include a mockup. Issues that add to, or change, the interface should
|
|
be given the ~"UX" label. This will allow the UX team to provide input and guidance. You may
|
|
need to ask one of the [core team](https://about.gitlab.com/community/core-team/) members to add the label, if you do not have permissions to do it by yourself.
|
|
|
|
If you want to create something yourself, consider opening an issue first to
|
|
discuss whether it is interesting to include this in GitLab.
|
|
|
|
## Issue weight
|
|
|
|
Issue weight allows us to get an idea of the amount of work required to solve
|
|
one or multiple issues. This makes it possible to schedule work more accurately.
|
|
|
|
You are encouraged to set the weight of any issue. Following the guidelines
|
|
below will make it easy to manage this, without unnecessary overhead.
|
|
|
|
1. Set weight for any issue at the earliest possible convenience
|
|
1. If you don't agree with a set weight, discuss with other developers until
|
|
consensus is reached about the weight
|
|
1. Issue weights are an abstract measurement of complexity of the issue. Do not
|
|
relate issue weight directly to time. This is called [anchoring](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring)
|
|
and something you want to avoid.
|
|
1. Something that has a weight of 1 (or no weight) is really small and simple.
|
|
Something that is 9 is rewriting a large fundamental part of GitLab,
|
|
which might lead to many hard problems to solve. Changing some text in GitLab
|
|
is probably 1, adding a new Git Hook maybe 4 or 5, big features 7-9.
|
|
1. If something is very large, it should probably be split up in multiple
|
|
issues or chunks. You can simply not set the weight of a parent issue and set
|
|
weights to children issues.
|
|
|
|
## Regression issues
|
|
|
|
Every monthly release has a corresponding issue on the CE issue tracker to keep
|
|
track of functionality broken by that release and any fixes that need to be
|
|
included in a patch release (see
|
|
[8.3 Regressions](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/issues/4127) as an example).
|
|
|
|
As outlined in the issue description, the intended workflow is to post one note
|
|
with a reference to an issue describing the regression, and then to update that
|
|
note with a reference to the merge request that fixes it as it becomes available.
|
|
|
|
If you're a contributor who doesn't have the required permissions to update
|
|
other users' notes, please post a new note with a reference to both the issue
|
|
and the merge request.
|
|
|
|
The release manager will
|
|
[update the notes](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/release-tools/blob/master/doc/pro-tips.md#update-the-regression-issue)
|
|
in the regression issue as fixes are addressed.
|
|
|
|
## Technical and UX debt
|
|
|
|
In order to track things that can be improved in GitLab's codebase,
|
|
we use the ~"technical debt" label in [GitLab's issue tracker](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues).
|
|
For missed user experience requirements, we use the ~"UX debt" label.
|
|
|
|
These labels should be added to issues that describe things that can be improved,
|
|
shortcuts that have been taken, features that need additional attention, and all
|
|
other things that have been left behind due to high velocity of development.
|
|
For example, code that needs refactoring should use the ~"technical debt" label,
|
|
something that didn't ship according to our Design System guidelines should
|
|
use the ~"UX debt" label.
|
|
|
|
Everyone can create an issue, though you may need to ask for adding a specific
|
|
label, if you do not have permissions to do it by yourself. Additional labels
|
|
can be combined with these labels, to make it easier to schedule
|
|
the improvements for a release.
|
|
|
|
Issues tagged with these labels have the same priority like issues
|
|
that describe a new feature to be introduced in GitLab, and should be scheduled
|
|
for a release by the appropriate person.
|
|
|
|
Make sure to mention the merge request that the ~"technical debt" issue or
|
|
~"UX debt" issue is associated with in the description of the issue.
|
|
|
|
## Technical debt in follow-up issues
|
|
|
|
It's common to discover technical debt during development of a new feature. In
|
|
the spirit of "minimum viable change", resolution is often deferred to a
|
|
follow-up issue. However, this cannot be used as an excuse to merge poor-quality
|
|
code that would otherwise not pass review, or to overlook trivial matters that
|
|
don't deserve to be scheduled independently, and would be best resolved in the
|
|
original merge request - or not tracked at all!
|
|
|
|
The overheads of scheduling, and rate of change in the GitLab codebase, mean
|
|
that the cost of a trivial technical debt issue can quickly exceed the value of
|
|
tracking it. This generally means we should resolve these in the original merge
|
|
request - or simply not create a follow-up issue at all.
|
|
|
|
For example, a typo in a comment that is being copied between files is worth
|
|
fixing in the same MR, but not worth creating a follow-up issue for. Renaming a
|
|
method that is used in many places to make its intent slightly clearer may be
|
|
worth fixing, but it should not happen in the same MR, and is generally not
|
|
worth the overhead of having an issue of its own. These issues would invariably
|
|
be labeled `~P4 ~S4` if we were to create them.
|
|
|
|
More severe technical debt can have implications for development velocity. If
|
|
it isn't addressed in a timely manner, the codebase becomes needlessly difficult
|
|
to change, new features become difficult to add, and regressions abound.
|
|
|
|
Discoveries of this kind of technical debt should be treated seriously, and
|
|
while resolution in a follow-up issue may be appropriate, maintainers should
|
|
generally obtain a scheduling commitment from the author of the original MR, or
|
|
the engineering or product manager for the relevant area. This may take the form
|
|
of appropriate Priority / Severity labels on the issue, or an explicit milestone
|
|
and assignee.
|
|
|
|
The maintainer must always agree before an outstanding discussion is resolved in
|
|
this manner, and will be the one to create the issue. The title and description
|
|
should be of the same quality as those created
|
|
[in the usual manner](#technical-and-ux-debt) - in particular, the issue title
|
|
**must not** begin with `Follow-up`! The creating maintainer should also expect
|
|
to be involved in some capacity when work begins on the follow-up issue.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
[Return to Contributing documentation](index.md)
|