db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dag.Wan...@Sun.COM (Dag H. Wanvik)
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-1252) Old clients with new server return wrong database metadata values for some methods
Date Thu, 03 Aug 2006 22:47:37 GMT
"Kathey Marsden (JIRA)" <derby-dev@db.apache.org> writes:

>     [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1252?page=comments#action_12425609 ]

>             
> Kathey Marsden commented on DERBY-1252:
> ---------------------------------------
>
> now that this is fixed , is there still existing application impact?
> If not then we should uncheck the box.  "Existing application
> impact" should a field users can query on to see if there have been
> changes that might affect their application. Once a regression is
> fixed it can be unchecked if there is nothing that remains that
> might impact users.

Yes, I was wondering about that.. For "regression" I guess one could
argue that these flags are a characteristic of the bug, and should be
left, and that, being closed, the problem is gone as
well. "Application impact" seems more belonging to the solution, and
then it gets muddy..

I agree it is more useful (and workable) to let both flags reflect the
current state of the issue (as we do for patch available). I checked
http://db.apache.org/derby/binaries/FilingDerbyIssuesInJira.doc for
explanation of how these fields should be used but didn't find
anything. Does anyone know if is it explained elsewhere? If not, I
think it would be good up update the document.

Thanks,
Dag

Mime
View raw message