db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kathey Marsden <kmarsdende...@sbcglobal.net>
Subject Re: 10.1.3 Wow!
Date Wed, 31 May 2006 18:02:28 GMT
Myrna van Lunteren wrote:

> Does the 'Unassigned' show up because of a patch or comment by that 
> signature?
>
Unassigned just means an issue was marked fixed but a developer never 
assigned themselves to the issue. Some are probably perfectly ok to be 
unassigned.
For 10.1.3 these are the issues that are affected:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&&pid=10594&resolution=1&fixfor=12310616&fixfor=12310631&fixfor=12310750&fixfor=12310880&assigneeSelect=unassigned&sorter/field=issuekey&sorter/order=DESC

Categories seem to be

- Folks fixed stuff but didn't assign themselves. (e.g. DERBY-701)
- Fixes were incorporated into patches for other issues but fixer did 
not assign themselves. (e.g. DERBY-902)
- Bugs that should have been closed as dups were marked fixed (e.g. 
DERBY-1335)
- Top level tasks were left unassigned once assigned subtasks were 
completed. (e.g. DERBY-649)

All just part of the ongoing Jira maintenance needed for accurate 
reporting.  "Garbage in, Garbage out"


Kathey

http://computing-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Garbage+in%2c+garbage+out


Mime
View raw message