Fixed issues with no Fix Version marked

[Kathey Marsden <km...@sbcglobal.net>]

I noticed there are 94  issues marked "Fixed" with no fix version marked.

It would be good if developers could look at the  list and mark the
fixin's for their issues (just about everyone has some) or perhaps there
is a volunteer who would like to make the pass.  I marked some bugs that
I was interested in.
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&&pid=10594&resolution=1&fixfor=-1&sorter/field=issuekey&sorter/order=DESC

Having Jira  info correct sure makes things easier for users trying to find out 
which version has a fix, developers considering porting fixes for the 10.1.3 
release, and those evaluating merit for potential committer candidates.

Thanks


Kathey

Re: Fixed issues with no Fix Version marked

[Daniel John Debrunner <dj...@apache.org>]

Kathey Marsden wrote:

> Myrna van Lunteren wrote:
> 
> 
>>I went through the list, and I noticed issue DERBY-625...However, I'm not
>>sure what to do with that one. The bug is not actually with Derby. How do I
>>mark that - not a bug?
>>
>> 
>>
> 
> I tend to say mark it fixed in whatever version you confirmed the fix
> and indicate that the fix requires whatever j9 version you tested with.

Hmmm, since there were no changes in Derby seems like marking it fixed
in a specific version of Derby is wrong. Maybe this is a case where this
is no fixed version in Jira.

Dan.

Re: Fixed issues with no Fix Version marked

[Kathey Marsden <km...@sbcglobal.net>]

Myrna van Lunteren wrote:

>I went through the list, and I noticed issue DERBY-625...However, I'm not
>sure what to do with that one. The bug is not actually with Derby. How do I
>mark that - not a bug?
>
>  
>
I tend to say mark it fixed in whatever version you confirmed the fix
and indicate that the fix requires whatever j9 version you tested with.


Kathey

Re: Fixed issues with no Fix Version marked

[Myrna van Lunteren <m....@gmail.com>]

On 4/10/06, Daniel John Debrunner <dj...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Dyre.Tjeldvoll@Sun.COM wrote:
>
> > Kathey Marsden <km...@sbcglobal.net> writes:
> >
> >
> >>I noticed there are 94  issues marked "Fixed" with no fix version
> marked.
> >>
> >>It would be good if developers could look at the  list and mark the
> >>fixin's for their issues (just about everyone has some)


I went through the list, and I noticed issue DERBY-625...However, I'm not
sure what to do with that one. The bug is not actually with Derby. How do I
mark that - not a bug?

Myrna

Re: Fixed issues with no Fix Version marked

[Daniel John Debrunner <dj...@apache.org>]

Dyre.Tjeldvoll@Sun.COM wrote:

> Kathey Marsden <km...@sbcglobal.net> writes:
> 
> 
>>I noticed there are 94  issues marked "Fixed" with no fix version marked.
>>
>>It would be good if developers could look at the  list and mark the
>>fixin's for their issues (just about everyone has some) 
> 
> 
> Stupid question: Why? If something is fixed with no particular
> version, doesn't that mean that it is fixed in the trunk? And doesn't that
> mean that the fix will make it into the first release that is branched
> after the fix was committed? 
> 
> For a long time I have assumed that the next release was going to be
> 10.2. Now, if I had marked issues as 10.2, does that mean they will
> not be a part of 10.1.3? Do I have to go through everything that I have
> marked as 10.2 and change fixin to 10.1.3?
> 
> IMHO it would be better to leave the fixin version blank to signal
> that they should be part of the first available release, whatever it
> is called.

The 10.1.3 release will be off the 10.1 branch, so anything fixed in the
trunk will not be in 10.1.3 unless someone merges it.

I think having a valid release number in the fixed version helps users
see when the fix will be available. A blank fix version gives them no
information.

>>or perhaps there
>>is a volunteer who would like to make the pass.  I marked some bugs that
>>I was interested in.
>>http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&&pid=10594&resolution=1&fixfor=-1&sorter/field=issuekey&sorter/order=DESC
>>
>>Having Jira  info correct sure makes things easier for users trying to find out 
>>which version has a fix, developers considering porting fixes for the 10.1.3 
>>release, 
> 
> 
> But this only applies to fixes committed after 10.1.3 was branched,
> right? Anything committed to trunk prior to that is automatically
> part of 10.3.1, isn't it?

Yes, but the 10.1 branch was a while ago.

Dan.

Re: Fixed issues with no Fix Version marked

[Dy...@Sun.COM]

Kathey Marsden <km...@sbcglobal.net> writes:

> I noticed there are 94  issues marked "Fixed" with no fix version marked.
>
> It would be good if developers could look at the  list and mark the
> fixin's for their issues (just about everyone has some) 

Stupid question: Why? If something is fixed with no particular
version, doesn't that mean that it is fixed in the trunk? And doesn't that
mean that the fix will make it into the first release that is branched
after the fix was committed? 

For a long time I have assumed that the next release was going to be
10.2. Now, if I had marked issues as 10.2, does that mean they will
not be a part of 10.1.3? Do I have to go through everything that I have
marked as 10.2 and change fixin to 10.1.3?

IMHO it would be better to leave the fixin version blank to signal
that they should be part of the first available release, whatever it
is called.

> or perhaps there
> is a volunteer who would like to make the pass.  I marked some bugs that
> I was interested in.
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&&pid=10594&resolution=1&fixfor=-1&sorter/field=issuekey&sorter/order=DESC
>
> Having Jira  info correct sure makes things easier for users trying to find out 
> which version has a fix, developers considering porting fixes for the 10.1.3 
> release, 

But this only applies to fixes committed after 10.1.3 was branched,
right? Anything committed to trunk prior to that is automatically
part of 10.3.1, isn't it?

-- 
dt