commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [lang] Use of "Review Patch"
Date Thu, 16 Apr 2015 11:49:45 GMT
Hello,

I usually mark tickets as "Review Patch" when code has been suggested. I've
used "Discuss" to indicate that I'm not sure whether we should dive into
implementation at all. If a ticket has code but it looks like the wrong
approach, I use both versions. Duncan: feel free to modify tickets the ways
that you can work through them easily.

Regarding the version vs. tags discussion: Yes, using the version property
in this way is somehow strange, but it way the best which Hen and I came up
with. I don't like tags, because you can't limit the set of allowed values.
This way if someone accidentally writes "Review Pathc", we won't find it.
I think "Discussion" and "Review Patch" a phases in the ticket life cycle,
so they should be modeled as ticket states in the jira ticket workflow
definition. But I did not have the time until know to find out whether this
is possible.

Benedikt

2015-04-15 22:24 GMT+02:00 Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>:

> I've never like using versions like this :-(
>
> Gary
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 1:19 PM, Paul Benedict <pbenedict@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Odd way to use versions, imo. Sounds like "discussion" and "review patch"
> > and "patch needed" tags would be the better tool.
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Paul
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Duncan Jones <djones@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > Currently the "Review Patch" fix version seems to be applied whenever
> > > code has been supplied in an issue. This includes situations where
> > > agreement hasn't yet been reached on fixing the issue and where the
> > > supplied "patch" is minimal at best.
> > >
> > > I would prefer if we only use this marker on issues where the
> > > discussions have already been completed and we've decided we want to
> > > go ahead with the alteration/addition.
> > >
> > > Do others agree with this? If so, I'll edit existing issues to match
> > > this. I then plan to try and clean up some of the "Discussion" items,
> > > so that we either close them or move them to "Review Patch" or "Patch
> > > Needed".
> > >
> > > Duncan
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>



-- 
http://people.apache.org/~britter/
http://www.systemoutprintln.de/
http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter
http://github.com/britter

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message