Automatically add `dev-doc-needed` flag

[SebastianZ]

When bugs for new web platform features are created, the reporters very often don't set the dev-doc-needed flag to notify the MDN team that the feature needs to be documented on MDN. And it requires quite some effort for the MDN team and others like me to look though all the bugs and check which things need to be documented.

So it would be great if this could be automated as far as possible.

Some criteria to consider is

• Product: "Core"
• Components: everything web platform features related, might be all related to "Audio/Video", "CSS", "DOM", "Graphics", "Internationalization", "JavaScript", "Layout", "MathML", "Networking", "Panning and Zooming", "Performance", "Privacy", "Security", "Storage", "SVG", "Web Audio", "Web Speech", "WebRTC", "WebVR", "XML", and "XSLT"
• Type: enhancement and task (Though it's often forgotten to set the type, so many features are filed as "defect". Therefore I'm not sure about that.)
• Flags: not "meta"

and there are other, optional indicators like

• certain keywords in the summary like "implement", "implementation", "add", "support", "consider", "update", "deprecate", "drop", "remove", "ship", "trains" (from "Let xyz ride the trains"), "enable", and "api".
• a specification URL under the related URLs.
• certain flags like DevAdvocacy, parity-*, and site-compat.
• [DevRel or [layout in the Whiteboard field.

@hamishwillee and others from the MDN team may provide some more feedback on this.

Sebastian

[marco-c]

We have a prototype model for this in bugbug which we could improve and validate: https://github.com/mozilla/bugbug/blob/master/bugbug/models/devdocneeded.py.

[hamishwillee]

@SebastianZ Thanks very much - I've pinged the rest of the Mozilla-employed MDN content authors for comment.

This is a good idea. It might be even better if it could be done as wizard like behaviour that prompted the submitter on creation (though that might be too obtrusive) so that they thought about it (I worry about a flood of false positives). "Ship" is definitely something to look at as part of the selection criteria.

FYI Recently the browser-compat-team have made finding the missed release issues a bit easier for us via testing - such as https://github.com/mdn/browser-compat-data/pull/23730. The thing to note here is that compat tests look at IDL in specs, and may not catch some things that cannot be automatically detected, such as support for optional params in values passed to methods.

EDIT, we might also want to do some work to look at what should not be included. For example, I wasn't sure on https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901491 , and the answer is "not yet".

[hamishwillee]

@SebastianZ We missed this one that wasn't tagged https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1825580. However it was tagged with need for a relnote, so triggering on this would be good too