db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Embretsen <John.Embret...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Derby commit process
Date Wed, 01 Mar 2006 11:44:58 GMT
Andrew McIntyre wrote:
> On 2/28/06, John Embretsen <John.Embretsen@sun.com> wrote:
>> * Patch available
>> * Patch reviewed
>> * Patch revised
>> * Patch finalized
>> I think enabling these status items for the Derby project would improve our
>> "commit process" - certainly it will reduce confusion regarding our "Patch
>> available" check box. Any chance these status items can be enabled for Derby
>> (and remove the "Patch available" check box)?
> Oh dear. I had been playing with the workflows in JIRA and created
> some new status types, and I didn't realize that they would be
> viewable anywhere in JIRA since they're not actually part of any
> workflow. They can't just be 'enabled' because they have to be part of
> a workflow scheme, and I didn't get around to finishing it.

Oh, I see. I thought this was generally available, and that some other 
projects were already using these status options.

For the record, I was thinking along the following lines regarding the status 

Patch available -> Contributor uploaded patch to Jira, patch is ready for review.

Patch reviewed -> Someone has reviewed the patch. Comments by the reviewer(s) 
and the contributor should indicate whether they think the patch is ready for 
commit. If it is clear that more eyes are needed to review the patch, the 
status should perhaps not be set to "Patch reviewed". In any case, it is 
always up to the committers to decide whether a patch should be committed or not.

Patch revised -> Contributor uploaded new version of the patch which 
addresses previous reviewers' comments. The new patch is ready for additional 

Patch finalized -> Not sure about this one...

> The reason I didn't finish the workflow is because JIRA's workflow
> editor does not allow you to insert common actions (like Resolve or
> Close) into a workflow with their GUI. Instead, the XML for the
> workflow would need to be edited directly to add the common actions
> into the new steps. The workflows are based on the XML schema
> developed by the OSWorkflow project:
> http://www.opensymphony.com/osworkflow/
> I don't have time to work on it at the moment. If someone was really
> interested, I could dump out the skeleton workflow in XML format for
> them to work on.

I have other things on my list too... The current workflow works fine in the 
meantime :)



View raw message