4 Oct
2012
4 Oct
'12
12:20 a.m.
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
On Oct 3, 2012, at 10:00 PM, Eduard Moraru <enygma2002(a)gmail.com> wrote:
did
I think you could do that by using the "Watch" feature on issues you`re
interested in (have reviewed). Then you can do a query like: "resolution =
Unresolved AND watcher in (currentUser())" and see all the issues you`ve
"reviewed". I did not find an UI alternative to get this list of issues :)
Thanks,
Eduard
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
>
> On Oct 3, 2012, at 6:49 PM, Marius Dumitru Florea <
> mariusdumitru.florea(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
>
>> I agree with Edy. For me "Future" means "reviewed and not planned
for
>> any time soon".
>
> The problem is not the meaning; we understand why we introduced it...
>
> Can you explain to me how you've been using it?
>
> If you check current stats you'll see some marked "future" and the
vast
> majority not scheduled. The reason is that we're not using it and
honestly
> I have no clue how to use it properly because
once you mark one as
future
what do
you do with it?
I imagined that, before Roadmap meetings for the next release/cycle, you
go trough
the (publicly available) list of issues marked as 'Future' and
consider them to be high priority since they are in the "queue". If you not do that until now and do not plan to do it,
then sure, it's useless.
How else do you/we keep track of important issues across time/versions? I
don`t imagine that a personal list would be the solution for the whole
(public) open source project.
Actually it would be cool if JIRA allowed to add personal labels (i.e.
labels that only you can see). That would allow to keep your own list of
issues you've reviewed for example.
-Vincent
The current approach (with the 'Future'
marker) still seems to me to be
an
uncomplicated solution to this problem. I don`t
even feel the need for
the
NEW and OPEN markers as Sergiu suggested, since
we have "In Progress" and
"Future" to differentiate between actively or "passively" working on
an
issue. Also, there is the "Assigned" field that represents the fact that
a
*committer* is engaged to fix the issue (can be
at his own will) and
there
is the 'Future' version that represents
that the *community/project* is
engaged in fixing the issue as soon as possible, even if there is
currently
no assigned committer. Without such a marker, our
reporters might get a
sense of abandonment if they see no activity on their issue.
Anyway, that's all I had to say on the matter. Maybe your experience with
issue/roadmap management is more likely to be correct compared with my
above judgement.
Thanks,
Eduard
> And since we don't have more visibility than the current release there's
> no way to decide further than that if it's planned for the current
release
> then we set the fixfor for the current
release...
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
>> Thanks,
>> Marius
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Eduard Moraru <enygma2002(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>> I don`t know, for me it`s good to be able to see which issues are in
our
>>> "queue", besides the great
sea of not yet processed issues :) I agree
> that
>>> we don`t use it much, but I would not go as far as to remove it, so
I`m
> -0.
>>>
>>> What happens to issues we discuss/tackle, but don`t manage to
>>> finish/implement them on time? Do we throw them back into the sea
> (instead
>>> of putting them aside for 'Future')?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Eduard
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>
> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi devs,
>>>>
>>>> It seems we've never really used the "future' version in
jira. I'd
like
>>>> like to propose to remove it.
>>>>
>>>> The idea was that issues that had been reviewed and marked for later
> were
>>>> supposed to use "future" but in practice we are not doing it.
>>>>
>>>> WDYT?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> -Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs