commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Phil Steitz <>
Subject Re: Committing Code, JIRA Gardening
Date Sat, 03 Jan 2015 18:36:02 GMT
On 1/3/15 11:01 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 3 January 2015 at 12:32, Benedikt Ritter <> wrote:
>> Hello Carl,
>> 2015-01-03 2:49 GMT+01:00 Carl Hall <>:
>>> Thanks, Benedikt and Mark.  I have made my first commit (woo!) and will
>>> start working through JIRA to clear out the easy stuff.  Is there any rule
>>> (by writ or general practice) for closing tickets that haven't seen any
>>> action in some time?  Seems like old tickets that haven't moved in a while
>>> (e.g. [1]) might be candidates for "reopen if this becomes interesting
>>> again."
>> There is no strict procedure for this kind of issues. In your particular
>> case, Sebb has already commented that this addition doesn't really make
>> sense. Since the contributor hasn't reacted on the comment, I think it's
>> okay to close this issue as Won't fix.
>> Note, that we only set the Fix Version for issues that have actually been
>> implemented. So when an issue is closed as Won't fix, duplicate, invalid
>> etc, we remove the fix version, so that it doesn't show up in the reports
>> for this version.
> In many components the fix version is only added when the fix is
> actually implemented.
> i.e. it is treated as "has been fixed in version x" rather than "this
> is an issue to be fixed in version x"

That varies by component.  Some of us use the fix version to
classify issues, i.e., to effectively set the scope for releases. 
We used to have a rule, no longer uniformly observed, that to
prepare a release you had to either resolve all open issues or
assign later fix versions for them - i.e., you could not cut a
release with open, unassigned issues.  Personally, I like that
policy and try to comply with it.   Components that work like this
also often use fix versions to indicate that a feature request will
require a major version release because it will require a
compatibility break.

>> Benedikt
>>> 1
>>> On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 2:04 AM, Mark Thomas <> wrote:
>>>> On 02/01/2015 08:50, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
>>>> <snip/>
>>>>> ... so the current process is to request the karma
>>>>>  just like you did. I think Mark Thomas or sebb can grant you the
>>> karma.
>>>>> Shouldn't take long.
>>>> Done.
>>>> Mark
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message