Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Plain View
Accumulo >> mail # dev >> RE: On ticket management


+
John Vines 2012-05-02, 21:51
+
Bob.Thorman@... 2012-05-02, 21:55
+
Adam Fuchs 2012-05-11, 00:34
+
David Medinets 2012-05-11, 01:23
+
John Vines 2012-05-11, 14:53
+
John Vines 2012-05-02, 13:31
+
Eric Newton 2012-05-02, 15:34
+
Mike Drob 2012-05-02, 18:07
+
Bob.Thorman@... 2012-05-02, 21:36
+
Keith Turner 2012-05-02, 21:49
+
Bob.Thorman@... 2012-05-02, 21:53
+
Josh Elser 2012-05-03, 01:51
+
Eric Newton 2012-05-03, 02:55
+
David Medinets 2012-05-02, 21:50
+
Eric Newton 2012-05-11, 00:29
+
Eric Newton 2012-05-18, 13:26
+
Eric Newton 2012-05-11, 00:34
Copy link to this message
-
Re: On ticket management
-1

Given the options Jira has to track ownership, progress, and
completeness of a ticket, I think it makes the most sense to keep
tickets bound to committers. When work is done by a community member,
this also forces some QA by the assignee who would, most likely, have
the best knowledge of what needs to be implemented.

(non-binding?)

On 05/10/2012 07:29 PM, Eric Newton wrote:
> I think John makes a good point, so I'm calling for a vote.
>
> +1 tickets remain unassigned if you aren't actively working on them,
> committers will get ticket assignments by default, after they review the
> content, they are marked unassigned.
>
> -1 tickets should stay assigned to committers to avoid getting lost;
> stealing assigned tickets is encouraged.  One reserves a ticket with "Start
> Progress".
>
> This vote will be held open for 72 hours.
>
> -Eric
>
> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Eric Newton<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  wrote:
>
>> Tickets that remain unassigned don't seem to get any attention.
>>
>> I've been trying to close as many "easy" tickets as I can over the last
>> few days... and there's this giant pile of tickets that are unassigned that
>> I've not even started to look at.
>>
>> Unless we are rigorous about going through the unassigned tickets, I
>> prefer to keep them assigned to someone.
>>
>> -Eric
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 9:31 AM, John Vines<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  wrote:
>>
>>> So early on we took the stance that different committers owned different
>>> realms of the project. This makes sense, because we want to make sure that
>>> outside contributors don't have their patches ignored. However, this also
>>> means that all tickets under realm X will be assigned to that person.
>>>
>>> I am not a fan of this approach, for a few different reasons-
>>> 1. Committers get pidgeon-holed into very specific realms of the project
>>> 2. Committers can find themselves stuck with tickets that they are not
>>> that
>>> aware of and/or don't understand
>>> 3. Outsiders can be hesitant to begin contribution because with a ticket
>>> assigned they could think that they are working on it
>>> 4. At least for me, I would like to use assigned tickets to keep track of
>>> what I have on *MY* plate. That is, the things that I am working on and/or
>>> want and plan to work on next.
>>>
>>> I'm wondering what everyone's thoughts would be on making the default
>>> behavior for new tickets be unassigned (I imagine this is possible in
>>> JIRA)
>>> and the method for ticket assignment.  We can still divide up the realms
>>> for the committers for ensuring validity of the tickets and for handling
>>> patches though.  This would also mean purging all current ticket
>>> assignments, except those which should be legitimately assigned under the
>>> new methods.
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>
+
Billie J Rinaldi 2012-05-11, 21:28
+
David Medinets 2012-05-02, 15:55