You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@vcl.apache.org by Josh Thompson <jo...@ncsu.edu> on 2009/01/16 15:35:11 UTC
closed or resolved for Jira issues
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I just noticed I've used "closed" for a few Jira issues and others have
used "resolved".
Here are the descriptions you see when you select to close or resolve and
issue:
Close - Closing an issue indicates that there is no more work to be done on
it, and that it has been verified as complete.
Resolve - Resolving an issue indicates that the developers are satisfied the
issue is finished.
I found this in a forum
(http://www.nabble.com/JIRA:-"closed"-vs-"resolved"-td13351086.html):
- -----------------
several people have asked about the difference between resolved and closed in
JIRA. the idea behind this is that the programmer can resolve the bug when
he thinks it's fixed, and the reporter or QA team will close the bug when
it's confirmed.
obviously, we don't really have QA teams, and it's probably best not to rely
on users to close issues. so, i've created a new scheme that removes the
redundant closed step entirely, just leaving resolved. this will be the
default scheme for new projects, but if you want yours changes, please say.
- -----------------
Since we don't really have a QA team (separate from developers anyway), should
we just stop at resolved as well?
The concept of using both makes sense to me
bug filed -> open
developer fixes bug -> resolved
before release, someone looks at everything that's "resolved", after
successful test -> closed
Any thoughts?
Josh
- --
- -------------------------------
Josh Thompson
Systems Programmer
Virtual Computing Lab (VCL)
North Carolina State University
Josh_Thompson@ncsu.edu
919-515-5323
my GPG/PGP key can be found at pgp.mit.edu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFJcJsmV/LQcNdtPQMRAlcaAJ4sQQxtNt3rsmp6UgYjaNWDnWhzOgCcDSe0
tsi5kXHc7hCIGxgMrlDeIlc=
=DnjM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: closed or resolved for Jira issues
Posted by Aaron Peeler <aa...@ncsu.edu>.
Fine with me.
Aaron
--On January 16, 2009 1:07:18 PM -0500 Andy Kurth <an...@ncsu.edu>
wrote:
> We need to decide how the "Fix Version" property is handled when
> resolving an issue. A description of this property at:
> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira/docs/v3.11/projects.html#versions
>
> Fix Version(s) - this is the version(s) in which the issue was (or will
> be) fixed. For instance, the bug affecting versions 1.1 and 1.2 might be
> fixed in version 2.0. Note that issues which do not have a Fix Version
> are classified as 'Unscheduled', as shown in the screenshot above.
>
>
> I'm thinking this property would always be set to the next unreleased
> version but I'm confused because the property can be multivalued. What
> does everyone think of leaving this set to "Unknown" when a developer
> resolves an issue. When the issue is tested before a version is
> released, the tester can set the "Fix Version".
>
> -Andy
>
Aaron Peeler
OIT Advanced Computing
College of Engineering-NCSU
919.513.4571
http://vcl.ncsu.edu
Re: closed or resolved for Jira issues
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
On Jan 16, 2009, at 1:28 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>
> On Jan 16, 2009, at 1:58 PM, Josh Thompson wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm thinking the reason the property can be multivalued is to allow
>> for fixes
>> when multiple major versions are being maintained. For example,
>> say programX
>> maintains both 1.x and 2.x series releases. Let's say they're most
>> recent
>> releases are 1.5 and 2.1. They may have a bug that comes up that
>> affects
>> both 1.5 and 2.1. So, the Affects Versions property would be set
>> to both 1.5
>> and 2.1. Then, if it's a critical issue, they may release 1.5.1
>> and 2.1.1
>> that both contain the fix, requiring that the Fix Versions property
>> be set to
>> both 1.5.1 and 2.1.1.
>
> Right.
>
>>
>> Since we're not maintaining more than one series of release, I'd
>> say we just
>> go ahead and set it to the next unreleased version when the issue is
>> resolved.
>
> Sounds good to me.
Works for me as well. Now as punishment for taking the initiative
would you mind putting this into the wiki? :D
Regards,
Alan
Re: closed or resolved for Jira issues
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
On Jan 16, 2009, at 1:58 PM, Josh Thompson wrote:
>
> I'm thinking the reason the property can be multivalued is to allow
> for fixes
> when multiple major versions are being maintained. For example, say
> programX
> maintains both 1.x and 2.x series releases. Let's say they're most
> recent
> releases are 1.5 and 2.1. They may have a bug that comes up that
> affects
> both 1.5 and 2.1. So, the Affects Versions property would be set to
> both 1.5
> and 2.1. Then, if it's a critical issue, they may release 1.5.1 and
> 2.1.1
> that both contain the fix, requiring that the Fix Versions property
> be set to
> both 1.5.1 and 2.1.1.
Right.
>
> Since we're not maintaining more than one series of release, I'd say
> we just
> go ahead and set it to the next unreleased version when the issue is
> resolved.
Sounds good to me.
--kevan
Re: closed or resolved for Jira issues
Posted by Josh Thompson <jo...@ncsu.edu>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Friday January 16, 2009, Andy Kurth wrote:
> We need to decide how the "Fix Version" property is handled when resolving
> an issue. A description of this property at:
> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira/docs/v3.11/projects.html#versions
>
> Fix Version(s) - this is the version(s) in which the issue was (or will be)
> fixed. For instance, the bug affecting versions 1.1 and 1.2 might be fixed
> in version 2.0. Note that issues which do not have a Fix Version are
> classified as 'Unscheduled', as shown in the screenshot above.
>
>
> I'm thinking this property would always be set to the next unreleased
> version but I'm confused because the property can be multivalued. What
> does everyone think of leaving this set to "Unknown" when a developer
> resolves an issue. When the issue is tested before a version is released,
> the tester can set the "Fix Version".
>
> -Andy
I'm thinking the reason the property can be multivalued is to allow for fixes
when multiple major versions are being maintained. For example, say programX
maintains both 1.x and 2.x series releases. Let's say they're most recent
releases are 1.5 and 2.1. They may have a bug that comes up that affects
both 1.5 and 2.1. So, the Affects Versions property would be set to both 1.5
and 2.1. Then, if it's a critical issue, they may release 1.5.1 and 2.1.1
that both contain the fix, requiring that the Fix Versions property be set to
both 1.5.1 and 2.1.1.
Since we're not maintaining more than one series of release, I'd say we just
go ahead and set it to the next unreleased version when the issue is
resolved.
That's my $0.02
Josh
- --
- -------------------------------
Josh Thompson
Systems Programmer
Virtual Computing Lab (VCL)
North Carolina State University
Josh_Thompson@ncsu.edu
919-515-5323
my GPG/PGP key can be found at pgp.mit.edu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFJcNjQV/LQcNdtPQMRAqGHAJ9gzoM8wZIA0lVg6ddMd5nFVaPvFgCfe5XE
Sbm79470Nv6Mk4A1764fQPY=
=Ucb4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: closed or resolved for Jira issues
Posted by Andy Kurth <an...@ncsu.edu>.
We need to decide how the "Fix Version" property is handled when resolving an
issue. A description of this property at:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira/docs/v3.11/projects.html#versions
Fix Version(s) - this is the version(s) in which the issue was (or will be)
fixed. For instance, the bug affecting versions 1.1 and 1.2 might be fixed in
version 2.0. Note that issues which do not have a Fix Version are classified as
'Unscheduled', as shown in the screenshot above.
I'm thinking this property would always be set to the next unreleased version
but I'm confused because the property can be multivalued. What does everyone
think of leaving this set to "Unknown" when a developer resolves an issue. When
the issue is tested before a version is released, the tester can set the "Fix
Version".
-Andy
Re: closed or resolved for Jira issues
Posted by Brian Bouterse <bm...@ncsu.edu>.
Sounds good to me too. I vote yes to the suggested use below.
-Brian
Brian Bouterse
Secure Open Systems Initiative
919.698.8796
On Jan 16, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Andy Kurth wrote:
> Sounds good to me.
> -Andy
>
>> bug filed -> open
>> developer fixes bug -> resolved
>> before release, someone looks at everything that's "resolved",
>> after successful test -> closed
>> Any thoughts?
>> Josh
>
Re: closed or resolved for Jira issues
Posted by Andy Kurth <an...@ncsu.edu>.
Sounds good to me.
-Andy
> bug filed -> open
> developer fixes bug -> resolved
> before release, someone looks at everything that's "resolved", after
> successful test -> closed
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Josh
Re: closed or resolved for Jira issues
Posted by Aaron Peeler <aa...@ncsu.edu>.
In case it wasn't clear - just realized you had a question...
I was voting yes to using both resolved and closed - as in your scenario:
>> bug filed -> open
>> developer fixes bug -> resolved
>> before release, someone looks at everything that's "resolved", after
>> successful test -> closed
-A
--On January 16, 2009 10:07:04 AM -0500 Aaron Peeler
<aa...@ncsu.edu> wrote:
>
> I have been using resolved for the issues I've worked on.
> I think your suggestion makes sense, so I vote yes.
>
> Aaron
>
>
>
>
> --On January 16, 2009 9:35:11 AM -0500 Josh Thompson
> <jo...@ncsu.edu> wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> I just noticed I've used "closed" for a few Jira issues and others have
>> used "resolved".
>>
>> Here are the descriptions you see when you select to close or resolve and
>> issue:
>>
>> Close - Closing an issue indicates that there is no more work to be done
>> on it, and that it has been verified as complete.
>>
>> Resolve - Resolving an issue indicates that the developers are satisfied
>> the issue is finished.
>>
>> I found this in a forum
>> (http://www.nabble.com/JIRA:-"closed"-vs-"resolved"-td13351086.html):
>>
>> - -----------------
>> several people have asked about the difference between resolved and
>> closed in JIRA. the idea behind this is that the programmer can resolve
>> the bug when he thinks it's fixed, and the reporter or QA team will
>> close the bug when it's confirmed.
>>
>> obviously, we don't really have QA teams, and it's probably best not to
>> rely on users to close issues. so, i've created a new scheme that
>> removes the redundant closed step entirely, just leaving resolved. this
>> will be the default scheme for new projects, but if you want yours
>> changes, please say. - -----------------
>>
>> Since we don't really have a QA team (separate from developers anyway),
>> should we just stop at resolved as well?
>>
>> The concept of using both makes sense to me
>>
>> bug filed -> open
>> developer fixes bug -> resolved
>> before release, someone looks at everything that's "resolved", after
>> successful test -> closed
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> Josh
>> - --
>> - -------------------------------
>> Josh Thompson
>> Systems Programmer
>> Virtual Computing Lab (VCL)
>> North Carolina State University
>>
>> Josh_Thompson@ncsu.edu
>> 919-515-5323
>>
>> my GPG/PGP key can be found at pgp.mit.edu
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>>
>> iD8DBQFJcJsmV/LQcNdtPQMRAlcaAJ4sQQxtNt3rsmp6UgYjaNWDnWhzOgCcDSe0
>> tsi5kXHc7hCIGxgMrlDeIlc=
>> =DnjM
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>
> Aaron Peeler
> OIT Advanced Computing
> College of Engineering-NCSU
> 919.513.4571
> http://vcl.ncsu.edu
Aaron Peeler
OIT Advanced Computing
College of Engineering-NCSU
919.513.4571
http://vcl.ncsu.edu
Re: closed or resolved for Jira issues
Posted by John Bass <jc...@gmail.com>.
I agree. Adding the closed state can always be done later if it's needed...
John Bass
john_bass@ncsu.edu
www.cnl.ncsu.edu
(919) 515-0154
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Aaron Peeler <aa...@ncsu.edu>wrote:
>
> I have been using resolved for the issues I've worked on.
> I think your suggestion makes sense, so I vote yes.
>
> Aaron
>
>
>
>
>
> --On January 16, 2009 9:35:11 AM -0500 Josh Thompson <
> josh_thompson@ncsu.edu> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> I just noticed I've used "closed" for a few Jira issues and others have
>> used "resolved".
>>
>> Here are the descriptions you see when you select to close or resolve and
>> issue:
>>
>> Close - Closing an issue indicates that there is no more work to be done
>> on it, and that it has been verified as complete.
>>
>> Resolve - Resolving an issue indicates that the developers are satisfied
>> the issue is finished.
>>
>> I found this in a forum
>> (http://www.nabble.com/JIRA:-"closed"-vs-"resolved"-td13351086.html):
>>
>> - -----------------
>> several people have asked about the difference between resolved and
>> closed in JIRA. the idea behind this is that the programmer can resolve
>> the bug when he thinks it's fixed, and the reporter or QA team will
>> close the bug when it's confirmed.
>>
>> obviously, we don't really have QA teams, and it's probably best not to
>> rely on users to close issues. so, i've created a new scheme that
>> removes the redundant closed step entirely, just leaving resolved. this
>> will be the default scheme for new projects, but if you want yours
>> changes, please say. - -----------------
>>
>> Since we don't really have a QA team (separate from developers anyway),
>> should we just stop at resolved as well?
>>
>> The concept of using both makes sense to me
>>
>> bug filed -> open
>> developer fixes bug -> resolved
>> before release, someone looks at everything that's "resolved", after
>> successful test -> closed
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> Josh
>> - --
>> - -------------------------------
>> Josh Thompson
>> Systems Programmer
>> Virtual Computing Lab (VCL)
>> North Carolina State University
>>
>> Josh_Thompson@ncsu.edu
>> 919-515-5323
>>
>> my GPG/PGP key can be found at pgp.mit.edu
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>>
>> iD8DBQFJcJsmV/LQcNdtPQMRAlcaAJ4sQQxtNt3rsmp6UgYjaNWDnWhzOgCcDSe0
>> tsi5kXHc7hCIGxgMrlDeIlc=
>> =DnjM
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>
>
>
> Aaron Peeler
> OIT Advanced Computing
> College of Engineering-NCSU
> 919.513.4571
> http://vcl.ncsu.edu
>
Re: closed or resolved for Jira issues
Posted by Aaron Peeler <aa...@ncsu.edu>.
I have been using resolved for the issues I've worked on.
I think your suggestion makes sense, so I vote yes.
Aaron
--On January 16, 2009 9:35:11 AM -0500 Josh Thompson
<jo...@ncsu.edu> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I just noticed I've used "closed" for a few Jira issues and others have
> used "resolved".
>
> Here are the descriptions you see when you select to close or resolve and
> issue:
>
> Close - Closing an issue indicates that there is no more work to be done
> on it, and that it has been verified as complete.
>
> Resolve - Resolving an issue indicates that the developers are satisfied
> the issue is finished.
>
> I found this in a forum
> (http://www.nabble.com/JIRA:-"closed"-vs-"resolved"-td13351086.html):
>
> - -----------------
> several people have asked about the difference between resolved and
> closed in JIRA. the idea behind this is that the programmer can resolve
> the bug when he thinks it's fixed, and the reporter or QA team will
> close the bug when it's confirmed.
>
> obviously, we don't really have QA teams, and it's probably best not to
> rely on users to close issues. so, i've created a new scheme that
> removes the redundant closed step entirely, just leaving resolved. this
> will be the default scheme for new projects, but if you want yours
> changes, please say. - -----------------
>
> Since we don't really have a QA team (separate from developers anyway),
> should we just stop at resolved as well?
>
> The concept of using both makes sense to me
>
> bug filed -> open
> developer fixes bug -> resolved
> before release, someone looks at everything that's "resolved", after
> successful test -> closed
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Josh
> - --
> - -------------------------------
> Josh Thompson
> Systems Programmer
> Virtual Computing Lab (VCL)
> North Carolina State University
>
> Josh_Thompson@ncsu.edu
> 919-515-5323
>
> my GPG/PGP key can be found at pgp.mit.edu
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFJcJsmV/LQcNdtPQMRAlcaAJ4sQQxtNt3rsmp6UgYjaNWDnWhzOgCcDSe0
> tsi5kXHc7hCIGxgMrlDeIlc=
> =DnjM
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Aaron Peeler
OIT Advanced Computing
College of Engineering-NCSU
919.513.4571
http://vcl.ncsu.edu