Fair enough. What I was hoping to achieve was some idea of when to cut
a release. Right now we sorta just wing it. When enough issues are
closed someone proposes the vote and we go from there. What might be
nice is knowing what open issues need to be fixed before we release
2.0.3 and what can wait until a 2.0.4.
I suppose we could adopt the new versions for issues going forward and
that wouldn't be terrible. Otherwise, if anyone has any ideas to fill
in that void, please pitch them.
Thanks,
Kevin
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:andru..bjectstyle.org]
> Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 11:38 AM
> To: de..ayenne.apache.org
> Subject: Re: JIRA changelog & roadmap
>
> > 1) Say forget it.
>
> +1 - all closed issues are already logged in the RELEASE-NOTES, so
> what do we care.
>
> Andrus
>
>
> On Feb 17, 2007, at 11:31 AM, Kevin Menard wrote:
>
> > Okay, this is actually a bit more complicated than I had
> hoped. The
> > issue is that the workflow used by the ASF JIRA does not allow for
> > bulk editing for closed issues. So, our three options are:
> >
> > 1) Say forget it.
> > 2) Re-open the "incorrect" closed issues and then close them again
> > with the new fix version.
> > 3) Request the infra folks involved to modify or create a
> new workflow
> > per [1].
> >
> > I'm still a fan of the change, but it appears I'm the only
> one to have
> > complained thus far, so 1) may be a viable option. 2) we can do on
> > our own. We'll just see a temporary flood of email as the
> issues are
> > opened and then closed (maybe about 20 total). 3) seems
> like a better
> > long term solution, but requires outside assistance that may not be
> > granted.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > [1]
> > http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira/docs/latest/
> > workflow.html#unedita
> > ble_steps
> >
> > --
> > Kevin
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:andru..bjectstyle.org]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 3:06 PM
> >> To: de..ayenne.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: JIRA changelog & roadmap
> >>
> >> Even better :-)
> >>
> >> I just added your id to Cayenne project admins in Jira.
> Let me know
> >> if this wasn't enough to edit the versions.
> >>
> >> Andrus
> >>
> >>
> >> On Feb 13, 2007, at 3:00 PM, Kevin Menard wrote:
> >>
> >>> I think once you "archive" a version it's no longer
> >> selectable in any
> >>> of the issue filings. For instance, we'd probably archive
> >> 1.2, 1.2.1,
> >>> 2.0, and 2.0.1, so they could not be selected as
> "affects" or "fix
> >>> version".
> >>> Bugs would then be logged against 1.2.2 and 2.0.2, with 1.2.3 and
> >>> 2.0.3
> >>> available as fix versions. Versions that are archived
> still retain
> >>> their changelogs though. So, I think that would address
> >> your concern.
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure how far back that feature goes, though, and if it's
> >>> available in the version the ASF runs. A JIRA admin
> would have to
> >>> look into that.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Kevin
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:andru..bjectstyle.org]
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 12:56 PM
> >>>> To: de..ayenne.apache.org
> >>>> Subject: Re: JIRA changelog & roadmap
> >>>>
> >>>> +1
> >>>>
> >>>> The downside is that we'll have a very long list of
> versions, with
> >>>> higher probability of making a mistake when picking one.
> >>>> But the upside (at least I hope) will be that the
> >> RELEASE-NOTES can
> >>>> be generated straight from Jira, regardless how many versions a
> >>>> particular fix affected (currently the RELEASE-NOTES.txt
> is built
> >>>> manually).
> >>>>
> >>>> Andrus
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sat Feb 17 2007 - 11:59:34 EST