Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of m.v.lunteren@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.160.44 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <50525D20.5030302@sbcglobal.net>
References: <50525D20.5030302@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 15:49:20 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CADjEm_VF0k5WiGpGgTciV=yR2Rpcox=b=gHF9nthADzh4U4myw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Is there value in closing bugs vs just resolving?
From: Myrna van Lunteren <m.v.lunteren@gmail.com>
To: derby-dev@db.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Katherine Marsden
<kmarsdenderby@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> I noticed in backport efforts or Jira Maintenance that dealing with closed
> bugs is kind of a pain.  In order to just add a label, fix a component or an
> affects version, you have to reopen it, do the operation and then re-resolve
> the issue as three separate operations. When doing bulk update the results
> of the query being used often change once the issues are reopened meaning
> manual lists to keep track.
>
> Is there real value in closing bugs vs just resolving?    If not it would be
> great to just  leave issues  resolved but unclosed.
>
> Thanks
>
> Kathey
>
I thought the idea was that resolving is was done by the person who
worked the issue, the closing was to be done by the person who logged
the issue, to indicate agreement with the resolution.

Myrna