db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hille...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: missing components
Date Tue, 11 Jul 2006 19:03:22 GMT
Thanks, Andrew. I have assigned 625 to the Test component and 86 to the 
Unknown component. Unknown works fine as a miscellaneous catch-all and 
makes issues disappear from the "...with no Component" reports hung off 
http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/DerbyJiraReports.

Cheers,
-Rick

Andrew McIntyre wrote:

> On 7/11/06, Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hillegas@sun.com> wrote:
>
>> I just went through the lists of "Open issues with no Component" and
>> "Resolved Issues with no Component" linked from
>> http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/DerbyJiraReports. For most of these, I
>> hazarded a guess about the correct component. However, a few still
>> puzzle me:
>>
>> 625, 1480 - These appear to be JVM/JIT issues. We don't have a component
>> for these.
>>
>> 86 - This has to do with changing Cloudscape references to say Derby
>> instead.
>>
>> I would appreciate the community's advice:
>>
>> 1) Should we create a new component for JVM/JIT issues?
>
>
> I don't think so. JVM/JIT issues are not Derby problems, per se, they
> are a problem for the JVM vendor. We may want to work around them, in
> which case the component assigned should be the area of the code where
> the workaround is made, if any. I would say assign 625 to Test (or
> Regression Test Failure), and I think that 1480 can be closed as
> Invalid. I'll take care of that, as I want to ask the reporter if this
> is actually a reproducible problem and whether or not he tried running
> with the JIT off, and direct him to filing a bug report with his JVM
> vendor.
>
>> 2) What should we do with issue 86? Does this deserve a new component?
>> Should we create a catch-all Miscellaneous component for these outliers?
>
>
> For lack of a better component, you could assign it to the Unknown
> component, it's the current catchall for things that don't fit into
> any of the other components.
>
> Does everything need to have a component? Clearly if there started to
> be many of the same type of issue, we would want to create a new
> category, but if it's a one-off sort of thing, is there a problem with
> leaving things with no component assigned, or assigning it to the
> Unknown component if it doesn't fit into any other current category?
>
> andrew



Mime
View raw message