Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of alexei.fedotov@gmail.com
 designates 66.249.82.229 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=am31qh4P7IXIaCEwMSPdxi7EcmvGlD6w42PyWaGoIIBukyRXdjom3jSW8MEhvX/McvS8fH3RGWeVGnnXV3NrLfJCK+QJV4yI5efVrsWYTPi6LHhTiFcHm44VZ0nIfcrTaSoFbK8hjAkjP2YAvsL+nyAGludl89iF6NRm7hpXUYg=
Message-ID: <c30d70960611131823ya85e7fcy658b60ac6115b235@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 05:23:04 +0300
From: "Alexei Fedotov" <alexei.fedotov@gmail.com>
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [jira] Patch available setting
In-Reply-To: <fc2fc95c0611130930l1120647aia688c50c27dce8e3@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <fc2fc95c0611130930l1120647aia688c50c27dce8e3@mail.gmail.com>

Sian,
This is a good catch. I have the following justification for 3. I
think it is better process when a bug submitter validates a patch
*before* commit to ensure that it is good. Also it validates the patch
*after*. This worth to be requested via public alias.

Why a bug submitter should do a pre-commit check? He has most interest
in the bug resolution.

Thanks!

On 11/13/06, Sian January <sianjanuary@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have just discovered that it's not possible for a contributor to set
> "Patch available" on a JIRA unless they reported it.  (I'm not sure about
> committers as I'm not one...)  I imagine this is to stop people coming in
> and editing other details on the JIRA, so I can see that it makes sense.  My
> question is, what is the best thing to do if I attach a patch to a JIRA and
> I can't set "Patch available"?  I can think of three alternatives at the
> moment:
>
> 1. Assume that the reporter will notice and set it themselves (or commit the
> fix if they're also a comitter)
> 2. E-mail the reporter privately
> 3. Post to the mailing list
>
> Or a fourth alternative would be a combination of the above where the person
> who contributed the patch waits a few days before doing either 2 or 3.  Any
> thoughts on what would be best?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sian
>
> --
> Sian January
>
> IBM Java Technology Centre, UK
>
>


-- 
Thank you,
Alexei