You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> on 2011/06/19 21:30:35 UTC
Convoluted jiras
Since my lame attempt at humor on the last thread led to some
confusion, I'll keep this relatively straight.
Consider, if you please, http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-2258.
For one thing, this report is marked as 'superceded by' another, but
it's still open. What's that mean?
For another, it wends it ways through various topics, ending up with a
supposition that the OP's original problem might have, in fact, been a
result of a more-or-less by design behavior. At least, a behavior with
the possibility of causing havoc if lightly changed.
Personally, I don't find this sort of thing helpful. I would give it
the same treatment as discussed in the other thread. Either there's a
concrete unwanted behavior, with a test case, or not. If there is, we
should endeavor to resolve it in a comprehensible way.
Other opinions?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Convoluted jiras
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
It's closed because I, myself, closed it today :-)
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 8:47 PM, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On 20/06/2011, at 5:30 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
>> Since my lame attempt at humor on the last thread led to some
>> confusion, I'll keep this relatively straight.
>>
>> Consider, if you please, http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-2258.
>>
>> For one thing, this report is marked as 'superceded by' another, but
>> it's still open. What's that mean?
>
> That's not very helpful. I'd remove that link, or maybe make it "related".
>
>>
>> For another, it wends it ways through various topics, ending up with a
>> supposition that the OP's original problem might have, in fact, been a
>> result of a more-or-less by design behavior. At least, a behavior with
>> the possibility of causing havoc if lightly changed.
>>
>> Personally, I don't find this sort of thing helpful. I would give it
>> the same treatment as discussed in the other thread. Either there's a
>> concrete unwanted behavior, with a test case, or not. If there is, we
>> should endeavor to resolve it in a comprehensible way.
>>
>> Other opinions?
>
> I agree with the current state - it should stay closed, and anyone that wants to report a different case can create a new issue linking back to that one.
>
> If I catch a comment on a closed issue I generally tell them to start a new one. I'll only reopen if there hasn't been a release and it can be reclosed in a reasonable time (otherwise you mess up historical release notes).
>
> - Brett
>
> --
> Brett Porter
> brett@apache.org
> http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
> http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Convoluted jiras
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
On 20/06/2011, at 5:30 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> Since my lame attempt at humor on the last thread led to some
> confusion, I'll keep this relatively straight.
>
> Consider, if you please, http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-2258.
>
> For one thing, this report is marked as 'superceded by' another, but
> it's still open. What's that mean?
That's not very helpful. I'd remove that link, or maybe make it "related".
>
> For another, it wends it ways through various topics, ending up with a
> supposition that the OP's original problem might have, in fact, been a
> result of a more-or-less by design behavior. At least, a behavior with
> the possibility of causing havoc if lightly changed.
>
> Personally, I don't find this sort of thing helpful. I would give it
> the same treatment as discussed in the other thread. Either there's a
> concrete unwanted behavior, with a test case, or not. If there is, we
> should endeavor to resolve it in a comprehensible way.
>
> Other opinions?
I agree with the current state - it should stay closed, and anyone that wants to report a different case can create a new issue linking back to that one.
If I catch a comment on a closed issue I generally tell them to start a new one. I'll only reopen if there hasn't been a release and it can be reclosed in a reasonable time (otherwise you mess up historical release notes).
- Brett
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org