search

crossminer / scava

https://eclipse.org/scava/
Eclipse Public License 2.0
18 stars 13 forks source link

Rename Kibiter viz "non resolved/closed bug"? #411

Closed mhow2 closed 4 years ago

mhow2 commented 4 years ago

For project sat4j , where issues are at https://gitlab.ow2.org/sat4j/sat4j/issues I got the following visualization in Kibiter:

image

It shows about 147 bugs that are "non resolved/closed". First I wonder if it would be less confusing to call the viz "open bugs" instead of introducing a negative statement. WDYT @valeriocos ?

Then I don't understand the number "147". What I can see is it's consistent with the metric raw data at http://scava-dev.ow2.org:8182/projects/p/sat4j/m/bugs.nonResolvedClosedBugs ,so it's not a problem with the dashboard but rather with how the thing is computed in relation to GitLab. @creat89 do you have an explanation ?

Regards,

creat89 commented 4 years ago

Checking the code, the one charged of setting that a bug is closed works for gitlab. I'm thinking that the issue comes from historic metric that calculates a cumulative historic metric and it doesn't reduces the number of open issues. I'll check the code later or tomorrow, as right now I'm on the phone.

valeriocos commented 4 years ago

It shows about 147 bugs that are "non resolved/closed". First I wonder if it would be less confusing to call the viz "open bugs" instead of introducing a negative statement. WDYT @valeriocos ?

I'm fine with any decision. Should I rename Non resolved/Closed bugs with Open bugs?

mhow2 commented 4 years ago

If I sum 148 "non resolved/closed bug" + 8 "fixed bug" reported in the last day for the viz , it is about 156 bugs, which is close to the 158 "all bugs" reported in GitLab...

creat89 commented 4 years ago

Hello @mhow2,

The platform is retrieving correctly the number of bugs. Two of them were updated before 2018: image

I have opened another issue (https://github.com/crossminer/scava/issues/416) regarding the number of closed issues in GitLab.

mhow2 commented 4 years ago

I'm fine with any decision. Should I rename Non resolved/Closed bugs with Open bugs?

I mean, you could have your own opinion :) As soon as the title of the viz mention "fixed and open", it looks more consistent to me to replace "non resolved/closed" by "open". And we don't need to mention "bugs" in labels as it's easy to deduce we're talking about bugs. So I would put labels as "open" and "fixed". Or maybe "fixed/resolved" to take into account the JIRA case wdyt @creat89

valeriocos commented 4 years ago

A PR is available at: https://github.com/crossminer/scava/pull/422, the new labels are "open" and "fixed/resolved"

valeriocos commented 4 years ago

Fixed with #422 , thanks