Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 92173 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2006 17:37:40 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 25 Jul 2006 17:37:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 71307 invoked by uid 500); 25 Jul 2006 17:37:31 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 71271 invoked by uid 500); 25 Jul 2006 17:37:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: Delivered-To: mailing list derby-dev@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 71233 invoked by uid 99); 25 Jul 2006 17:37:31 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 10:37:31 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.9 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,DNS_FROM_RFC_POST X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [32.97.182.145] (HELO e5.ny.us.ibm.com) (32.97.182.145) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 10:37:28 -0700 Received: from d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (d01relay02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.234]) by e5.ny.us.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k6PHb6YZ029708 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 13:37:06 -0400 Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (d01av01.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.215]) by d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (8.13.6/NCO/VER7.0) with ESMTP id k6PHb6vO229768 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 13:37:06 -0400 Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av01.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k6PHb59Y012662 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 13:37:05 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (MARSDEN-IBM-LT1.usca.ibm.com [9.72.134.67]) by d01av01.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k6PHb3eZ012538 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 13:37:05 -0400 Message-ID: <44C656BD.8030801@sbcglobal.net> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 10:37:01 -0700 From: Kathey Marsden Reply-To: kmarsdenderby@sbcglobal.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20060414 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: derby-dev@db.apache.org Subject: Fix Version for 10.2 unassigned issues (was Re: remaining 10.2 blocker) References: <44C111B0.9060009@sun.com> <44C19A86.7070408@sbcglobal.net> <44C19F31.2020506@sbcglobal.net> <44C4D999.4040305@sun.com> In-Reply-To: <44C4D999.4040305@sun.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Kathey Marsden wrote: >> >> * Mark Fix Version 10.2 for unassigned issues if we think it is >> a high value fix that could be fixed in time for the release. >> * Iteratively adjust Fix Version as we get closer to the release. >> * Use Blocker/Critical to mark must fix issues. >> Details here: >> http://www.nabble.com/prioritized-10.2-bug-list-tf1932945.html#a5301968 > > Rick Hillegas wrote: > Yes, please. This is an easy policy for me to wrap my mind around. > I think this use of the fix version field is a good start towards a framework for community bug review. I do have some trepidation about overloading priority this but don't have a better alternative. It would be great if everyone could please check the unassigned 10.2 issues and change Fix Version if needed. Are there any that are not high value fixes or cannot reasonably be resolved by 10.2 (August 10 for features/improvements, Sept 14 for bugs/test issues?) The unassigned 10.2 issues you filed: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&&pid=10594&resolution=-1&fixfor=11187&assigneeSelect=unassigned&reporterSelect=issue_current_user&sorter/field=issuekey&sorter/order=ASC&sorter/field=updated&sorter/order=DESC&sorter/field=priority&sorter/order=DESCrg/jira/secure/ConfigureReport.jspa?filterid=12310892 The unassigned 10.2 issues for components where you have expertise: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&&pid=10594&resolution=-1&fixfor=11187&assigneeSelect=unassigned&sorter/field=issuekey&sorter/order=ASC&sorter/field=updated&sorter/order=DESC&sorter/field=priority&sorter/order=DESCrg/jira/secure/ConfigureReport.jspa?filterid=12310892 (Qualify the query with the components of interest to you.) Also folks can start moving HighValueFixCandidates into 10.2 but it would be good to have the cleanup done sooner rather than later, so the really high value bugs stick out to developers looking for bugs to pickup for 10.2. Kathey