4 Jul
2013
4 Jul
'13
8:34 p.m.
On 07/04/2013 02:32 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
On 07/04/2013 02:21 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Also, about BFD stats, did the PR authors work _today_ on those issues?
If it's been idle for a while and a committer looked at them during a
BFD, then it's the committer that spent time looking at bugs, not the
author.
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu
Hi devs,
I saw that Marius and Thomas put as assignee the contributor who created the PR today:
* http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-9316
* http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-9232
Thus I've done the same for:
* http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-7403
I was under the impression that till now we were always using a committer as the assignee
in JIRA. The main reason we were doing this is that it's the committed code becomes
the committer's responsibility in case the code causes some issues.
The cons are:
* Less recognition of the contributor (even though he appears in the SCM thanks to
GitHub's PR).
* He won't appear in the BFD reports. For example:
http://jira.xwiki.org/secure/Dashboard.jspa?selectPageId=11604
I'm fine either way but it would be good to have an agreement on what strategy we
wish to follow.
Thanks
-Vincent
The assignee is the one responsible for the issue on the long term.
For me the committer is the one more likely to be the "long term"
person. A pull request might be a one-time contribution from someone
that disappears instantly after creating the PR. Although being credited
in the Jira filters is a good boost, it's not the only way to get
recognition, so it's not that important.
However, sometimes I do put the bugfixer as the assignee, when I
explicitly consider that the bugfixer will assume the responsibility,
and when I did almost nothing besides commiting the patch.
Perhaps we could add another field, besides reporter and assignee. I'm
not sure the extra effort/complexity would be that beneficial, though.
As a sidenote, GitHub's simple issue management only accepts a committer
for the assignee field.