You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> on 2013/02/14 12:13:12 UTC
JIRA cleanup inactive issues?
Hi,
JIRA currently has 739 Open, Unresolved issues, with no activity for >1year, which makes it difficult to get an overview over REAL issues.
The oldest of these, SOLR-36, have not been touched since July 2006 and is probably not valid anymore.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20in%20(SOLR%2C%20LUCENE)%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Open%20AND%20updated%20%3C%3D%20-365d%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20ASC
How about bulk updating all issues that have been inactive for >1year, encouraging creator to either close it or bring it up to date? If the comment includes a unique tag, we can later select those same issues which have still not seen activity within the next month or so, and bulk-close them. They will still be possible to revive if someone wants to.
The idea is that people who have been involved with the issue in the past would get a notification email. Problem is that will generate 739 "spam" mails on this mailing list, but it's perhaps worth it? We could turn off notifications, but then we'd not get the "ping" effect to those not following the list closely.
What do you think?
--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
RE: JIRA cleanup inactive issues?
Posted by Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de>.
Hi,
yes you can click on „do not send emails“ for bulk operations. But there is a big backside: The orginal reporter and watchers do not get the mail, too. And this is not good.
In my opinion, we should simply do this as a one-time bulk action and we all simply delete the mail. Another ides would be to temporary remove the dev@lao address from the JIRA project configs of LUCENE/SOLR, bulk close all those issues while sending mails, and then re-add the dev@lao address in the settings.
Uwe
-----
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
<http://www.thetaphi.de/> http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
From: Shai Erera [mailto:serera@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 2:37 PM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: JIRA cleanup inactive issues?
I did a scan like that, followed by "close" a long time ago, but then I did it for 2 years old JIRAs. Perhaps you can bulk close all issues that were not updated for more than 2 years?
That will generate much less spam (although I think that you can tick somewhere to not send messages for bulk operations).
We can make it a habit, like 01/01/newyear activity ... hmm .. similar to Lucene's 2-releases backwards index format policy :).
Shai
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com> wrote:
You know, the more I think about it, the more I'm of the opinion that we should just go ahead and close them aggressively. By that I mean take a _very_ quick look and decide whether it's interesting. If we close it and anyone's watching, they can feel free to re-open. If nobody's looking, the worst that'll happen is that someone will open a new issue if they see it again.
Besides, I want to see the graph with closed JIRAs have the green line above the red one....
FWIW,
Erick
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com> wrote:
+1. We might be able to cut down on the spam a bit if people spent some time triaging them first. I can do a little of that this weekend. 'course just closing them will spam the list too, but in a good way <G>.....
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 6:13 AM, Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
Hi,
JIRA currently has 739 Open, Unresolved issues, with no activity for >1year, which makes it difficult to get an overview over REAL issues.
The oldest of these, SOLR-36, have not been touched since July 2006 and is probably not valid anymore.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20in%20(SOLR%2C%20LUCENE)%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Open%20AND%20updated%20%3C%3D%20-365d%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20ASC
How about bulk updating all issues that have been inactive for >1year, encouraging creator to either close it or bring it up to date? If the comment includes a unique tag, we can later select those same issues which have still not seen activity within the next month or so, and bulk-close them. They will still be possible to revive if someone wants to.
The idea is that people who have been involved with the issue in the past would get a notification email. Problem is that will generate 739 "spam" mails on this mailing list, but it's perhaps worth it? We could turn off notifications, but then we'd not get the "ping" effect to those not following the list closely.
What do you think?
--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: JIRA cleanup inactive issues?
Posted by Shai Erera <se...@gmail.com>.
I did a scan like that, followed by "close" a long time ago, but then I did
it for 2 years old JIRAs. Perhaps you can bulk close all issues that were
not updated for more than 2 years?
That will generate much less spam (although I think that you can tick
somewhere to not send messages for bulk operations).
We can make it a habit, like 01/01/newyear activity ... hmm .. similar to
Lucene's 2-releases backwards index format policy :).
Shai
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>wrote:
> You know, the more I think about it, the more I'm of the opinion that we
> should just go ahead and close them aggressively. By that I mean take a
> _very_ quick look and decide whether it's interesting. If we close it and
> anyone's watching, they can feel free to re-open. If nobody's looking, the
> worst that'll happen is that someone will open a new issue if they see it
> again.
>
> Besides, I want to see the graph with closed JIRAs have the green line
> above the red one....
>
> FWIW,
> Erick
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> +1. We might be able to cut down on the spam a bit if people spent some
>> time triaging them first. I can do a little of that this weekend. 'course
>> just closing them will spam the list too, but in a good way <G>.....
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 6:13 AM, Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> JIRA currently has 739 Open, Unresolved issues, with no activity for
>>> >1year, which makes it difficult to get an overview over REAL issues.
>>> The oldest of these, SOLR-36, have not been touched since July 2006 and
>>> is probably not valid anymore.
>>>
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20in%20(SOLR%2C%20LUCENE)%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Open%20AND%20updated%20%3C%3D%20-365d%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20ASC
>>>
>>> How about bulk updating all issues that have been inactive for >1year,
>>> encouraging creator to either close it or bring it up to date? If the
>>> comment includes a unique tag, we can later select those same issues which
>>> have still not seen activity within the next month or so, and bulk-close
>>> them. They will still be possible to revive if someone wants to.
>>>
>>> The idea is that people who have been involved with the issue in the
>>> past would get a notification email. Problem is that will generate 739
>>> "spam" mails on this mailing list, but it's perhaps worth it? We could turn
>>> off notifications, but then we'd not get the "ping" effect to those not
>>> following the list closely.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
>>> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
>>> Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: JIRA cleanup inactive issues?
Posted by Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>.
Sorry for the spam, but one final thought: Let's tag them now so we can
find them again. That'll make closing them easier. Anyone who knows the
tagging mechanism better than me want to volunteer? I'll hold off on
closing any of them for a couple of days so others can chime in... And no,
I'm not going to go through _all_ of them at once, but looking over a few a
day will clean them up pretty quickly especially if others do too.
Erick
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>wrote:
> You know, the more I think about it, the more I'm of the opinion that we
> should just go ahead and close them aggressively. By that I mean take a
> _very_ quick look and decide whether it's interesting. If we close it and
> anyone's watching, they can feel free to re-open. If nobody's looking, the
> worst that'll happen is that someone will open a new issue if they see it
> again.
>
> Besides, I want to see the graph with closed JIRAs have the green line
> above the red one....
>
> FWIW,
> Erick
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> +1. We might be able to cut down on the spam a bit if people spent some
>> time triaging them first. I can do a little of that this weekend. 'course
>> just closing them will spam the list too, but in a good way <G>.....
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 6:13 AM, Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> JIRA currently has 739 Open, Unresolved issues, with no activity for
>>> >1year, which makes it difficult to get an overview over REAL issues.
>>> The oldest of these, SOLR-36, have not been touched since July 2006 and
>>> is probably not valid anymore.
>>>
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20in%20(SOLR%2C%20LUCENE)%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Open%20AND%20updated%20%3C%3D%20-365d%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20ASC
>>>
>>> How about bulk updating all issues that have been inactive for >1year,
>>> encouraging creator to either close it or bring it up to date? If the
>>> comment includes a unique tag, we can later select those same issues which
>>> have still not seen activity within the next month or so, and bulk-close
>>> them. They will still be possible to revive if someone wants to.
>>>
>>> The idea is that people who have been involved with the issue in the
>>> past would get a notification email. Problem is that will generate 739
>>> "spam" mails on this mailing list, but it's perhaps worth it? We could turn
>>> off notifications, but then we'd not get the "ping" effect to those not
>>> following the list closely.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
>>> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
>>> Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: JIRA cleanup inactive issues?
Posted by Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>.
You know, the more I think about it, the more I'm of the opinion that we
should just go ahead and close them aggressively. By that I mean take a
_very_ quick look and decide whether it's interesting. If we close it and
anyone's watching, they can feel free to re-open. If nobody's looking, the
worst that'll happen is that someone will open a new issue if they see it
again.
Besides, I want to see the graph with closed JIRAs have the green line
above the red one....
FWIW,
Erick
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>wrote:
> +1. We might be able to cut down on the spam a bit if people spent some
> time triaging them first. I can do a little of that this weekend. 'course
> just closing them will spam the list too, but in a good way <G>.....
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 6:13 AM, Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> JIRA currently has 739 Open, Unresolved issues, with no activity for
>> >1year, which makes it difficult to get an overview over REAL issues.
>> The oldest of these, SOLR-36, have not been touched since July 2006 and
>> is probably not valid anymore.
>>
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20in%20(SOLR%2C%20LUCENE)%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Open%20AND%20updated%20%3C%3D%20-365d%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20ASC
>>
>> How about bulk updating all issues that have been inactive for >1year,
>> encouraging creator to either close it or bring it up to date? If the
>> comment includes a unique tag, we can later select those same issues which
>> have still not seen activity within the next month or so, and bulk-close
>> them. They will still be possible to revive if someone wants to.
>>
>> The idea is that people who have been involved with the issue in the past
>> would get a notification email. Problem is that will generate 739 "spam"
>> mails on this mailing list, but it's perhaps worth it? We could turn off
>> notifications, but then we'd not get the "ping" effect to those not
>> following the list closely.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> --
>> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
>> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
>> Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>
Re: JIRA cleanup inactive issues?
Posted by Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>.
+1. We might be able to cut down on the spam a bit if people spent some
time triaging them first. I can do a little of that this weekend. 'course
just closing them will spam the list too, but in a good way <G>.....
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 6:13 AM, Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> JIRA currently has 739 Open, Unresolved issues, with no activity for
> >1year, which makes it difficult to get an overview over REAL issues.
> The oldest of these, SOLR-36, have not been touched since July 2006 and is
> probably not valid anymore.
>
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20in%20(SOLR%2C%20LUCENE)%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Open%20AND%20updated%20%3C%3D%20-365d%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20ASC
>
> How about bulk updating all issues that have been inactive for >1year,
> encouraging creator to either close it or bring it up to date? If the
> comment includes a unique tag, we can later select those same issues which
> have still not seen activity within the next month or so, and bulk-close
> them. They will still be possible to revive if someone wants to.
>
> The idea is that people who have been involved with the issue in the past
> would get a notification email. Problem is that will generate 739 "spam"
> mails on this mailing list, but it's perhaps worth it? We could turn off
> notifications, but then we'd not get the "ping" effect to those not
> following the list closely.
>
> What do you think?
>
> --
> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
> Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
Re: JIRA cleanup inactive issues?
Posted by Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>.
Hey
Great spring cleaning work going on here :) I think it's the right approach.
--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com
16. mars 2013 kl. 20:28 skrev Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>:
> Jan:
>
> I've hit on a new policy when I closed a bunch of things today. For those JIRAs that we decide NOT to close, I'm adding a comment explaining why I didn't close it and/or inviting comment. That has the effect of removing the JIRA from the query you provided and poking anyone still interested in it.
>
> FWIW,
> Erick
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
> I did a really small bulk-change for the 10 oldest LUCENE/SOLR issues without activity, and tagged them SPRING_CLEANING_2013
>
> That should spin off some activity, probably some will be closed due to various reasons, and perhaps some will be revived?
>
> If this proves effective, I'll do a new bulk in a week or so for the 25 issues never touched since 2008. I think that portioning THIS out in time in smaller chunks will gain more attention than a big bang thing.
>
> I'll probably also do some more manual inspection on some of the oldest which are obviously not relevant any more.
>
> --
> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
> Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com
>
> 15. feb. 2013 kl. 01:24 skrev Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>:
>
> >> but arbitrarily deciding an issue should be closed just becuase it's old
> >> doesn't really make sense to me to me.
> >
> > That was never the suggestion either. More to get rid of all the noise which is no longer relevant, neither to the issue creator or anyone else, then it's easier to browse through open issues knowing that someone actually care about those issues being fixed.
> >
> > It's great that Erick and others will contribute, but we save a lot of work distributing it to "stakeholders" first, then those interested can manually go through the remaining based on the tag.
> >
> > The real number of irrelevant Open issues is probably larger, since some issues are "Updated" last year, but those updates are also Bulk fix-version change or similar, not real activity. But that's for another day...
> >
> > The bulk update process is fairly simple. I'll volunteer. I propose to simply add a "Comment" to those 739 issues (Unfortunately there seems to be no way to bulk ADD a "Label", it would delete all existing ones, so that's why it's in the comment text):
> >
> >
> > This issue has been inactive for more than a year. Please close if it's no longer relevant/needed, or bring it up to date if you intend to work on it. INACTIVITY_REMINDER_20130215
> >
> >
> > Uwe, if it's simple to disconnect the mailinglist temporarily then that would be great.
> >
> > --
> > Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
> > Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
> > Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com
> >
> > 14. feb. 2013 kl. 19:33 skrev Chris Hostetter <ho...@fucit.org>:
> >
> >>
> >> : Why should an issue be closed just because it's been open for N years?
> >> ...
> >> : Why do we care about the number of open issues? Who is using this metric?
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Using a filter of "has not been modified in X days" to help find issues
> >> that are *likeley* no longer relevant seems fine, and then they can
> >> quickly be reviewed/closed if they are about code that no longer exists,
> >> or have already been implemented/fixed in another way.
> >>
> >> but arbitrarily deciding an issue should be closed just becuase it's old
> >> doesn't really make sense to me to me.
> >>
> >>
> >> -Hoss
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
Re: JIRA cleanup inactive issues?
Posted by Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>.
Jan:
I've hit on a new policy when I closed a bunch of things today. For those
JIRAs that we decide NOT to close, I'm adding a comment explaining why I
didn't close it and/or inviting comment. That has the effect of removing
the JIRA from the query you provided and poking anyone still interested in
it.
FWIW,
Erick
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
> I did a really small bulk-change for the 10 oldest LUCENE/SOLR issues
> without activity, and tagged them SPRING_CLEANING_2013
>
> That should spin off some activity, probably some will be closed due to
> various reasons, and perhaps some will be revived?
>
> If this proves effective, I'll do a new bulk in a week or so for the 25
> issues never touched since 2008. I think that portioning THIS out in time
> in smaller chunks will gain more attention than a big bang thing.
>
> I'll probably also do some more manual inspection on some of the oldest
> which are obviously not relevant any more.
>
> --
> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
> Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com
>
> 15. feb. 2013 kl. 01:24 skrev Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>:
>
> >> but arbitrarily deciding an issue should be closed just becuase it's old
> >> doesn't really make sense to me to me.
> >
> > That was never the suggestion either. More to get rid of all the noise
> which is no longer relevant, neither to the issue creator or anyone else,
> then it's easier to browse through open issues knowing that someone
> actually care about those issues being fixed.
> >
> > It's great that Erick and others will contribute, but we save a lot of
> work distributing it to "stakeholders" first, then those interested can
> manually go through the remaining based on the tag.
> >
> > The real number of irrelevant Open issues is probably larger, since some
> issues are "Updated" last year, but those updates are also Bulk fix-version
> change or similar, not real activity. But that's for another day...
> >
> > The bulk update process is fairly simple. I'll volunteer. I propose to
> simply add a "Comment" to those 739 issues (Unfortunately there seems to be
> no way to bulk ADD a "Label", it would delete all existing ones, so that's
> why it's in the comment text):
> >
> >
> > This issue has been inactive for more than a year. Please close if it's
> no longer relevant/needed, or bring it up to date if you intend to work on
> it. INACTIVITY_REMINDER_20130215
> >
> >
> > Uwe, if it's simple to disconnect the mailinglist temporarily then that
> would be great.
> >
> > --
> > Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
> > Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
> > Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com
> >
> > 14. feb. 2013 kl. 19:33 skrev Chris Hostetter <hossman_lucene@fucit.org
> >:
> >
> >>
> >> : Why should an issue be closed just because it's been open for N years?
> >> ...
> >> : Why do we care about the number of open issues? Who is using this
> metric?
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Using a filter of "has not been modified in X days" to help find issues
> >> that are *likeley* no longer relevant seems fine, and then they can
> >> quickly be reviewed/closed if they are about code that no longer exists,
> >> or have already been implemented/fixed in another way.
> >>
> >> but arbitrarily deciding an issue should be closed just becuase it's old
> >> doesn't really make sense to me to me.
> >>
> >>
> >> -Hoss
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
Re: JIRA cleanup inactive issues?
Posted by Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>.
I did a really small bulk-change for the 10 oldest LUCENE/SOLR issues without activity, and tagged them SPRING_CLEANING_2013
That should spin off some activity, probably some will be closed due to various reasons, and perhaps some will be revived?
If this proves effective, I'll do a new bulk in a week or so for the 25 issues never touched since 2008. I think that portioning THIS out in time in smaller chunks will gain more attention than a big bang thing.
I'll probably also do some more manual inspection on some of the oldest which are obviously not relevant any more.
--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com
15. feb. 2013 kl. 01:24 skrev Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>:
>> but arbitrarily deciding an issue should be closed just becuase it's old
>> doesn't really make sense to me to me.
>
> That was never the suggestion either. More to get rid of all the noise which is no longer relevant, neither to the issue creator or anyone else, then it's easier to browse through open issues knowing that someone actually care about those issues being fixed.
>
> It's great that Erick and others will contribute, but we save a lot of work distributing it to "stakeholders" first, then those interested can manually go through the remaining based on the tag.
>
> The real number of irrelevant Open issues is probably larger, since some issues are "Updated" last year, but those updates are also Bulk fix-version change or similar, not real activity. But that's for another day...
>
> The bulk update process is fairly simple. I'll volunteer. I propose to simply add a "Comment" to those 739 issues (Unfortunately there seems to be no way to bulk ADD a "Label", it would delete all existing ones, so that's why it's in the comment text):
>
>
> This issue has been inactive for more than a year. Please close if it's no longer relevant/needed, or bring it up to date if you intend to work on it. INACTIVITY_REMINDER_20130215
>
>
> Uwe, if it's simple to disconnect the mailinglist temporarily then that would be great.
>
> --
> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
> Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com
>
> 14. feb. 2013 kl. 19:33 skrev Chris Hostetter <ho...@fucit.org>:
>
>>
>> : Why should an issue be closed just because it's been open for N years?
>> ...
>> : Why do we care about the number of open issues? Who is using this metric?
>>
>> +1
>>
>> Using a filter of "has not been modified in X days" to help find issues
>> that are *likeley* no longer relevant seems fine, and then they can
>> quickly be reviewed/closed if they are about code that no longer exists,
>> or have already been implemented/fixed in another way.
>>
>> but arbitrarily deciding an issue should be closed just becuase it's old
>> doesn't really make sense to me to me.
>>
>>
>> -Hoss
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: JIRA cleanup inactive issues?
Posted by Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>.
> but arbitrarily deciding an issue should be closed just becuase it's old
> doesn't really make sense to me to me.
That was never the suggestion either. More to get rid of all the noise which is no longer relevant, neither to the issue creator or anyone else, then it's easier to browse through open issues knowing that someone actually care about those issues being fixed.
It's great that Erick and others will contribute, but we save a lot of work distributing it to "stakeholders" first, then those interested can manually go through the remaining based on the tag.
The real number of irrelevant Open issues is probably larger, since some issues are "Updated" last year, but those updates are also Bulk fix-version change or similar, not real activity. But that's for another day...
The bulk update process is fairly simple. I'll volunteer. I propose to simply add a "Comment" to those 739 issues (Unfortunately there seems to be no way to bulk ADD a "Label", it would delete all existing ones, so that's why it's in the comment text):
This issue has been inactive for more than a year. Please close if it's no longer relevant/needed, or bring it up to date if you intend to work on it. INACTIVITY_REMINDER_20130215
Uwe, if it's simple to disconnect the mailinglist temporarily then that would be great.
--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com
14. feb. 2013 kl. 19:33 skrev Chris Hostetter <ho...@fucit.org>:
>
> : Why should an issue be closed just because it's been open for N years?
> ...
> : Why do we care about the number of open issues? Who is using this metric?
>
> +1
>
> Using a filter of "has not been modified in X days" to help find issues
> that are *likeley* no longer relevant seems fine, and then they can
> quickly be reviewed/closed if they are about code that no longer exists,
> or have already been implemented/fixed in another way.
>
> but arbitrarily deciding an issue should be closed just becuase it's old
> doesn't really make sense to me to me.
>
>
> -Hoss
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: JIRA cleanup inactive issues?
Posted by Chris Hostetter <ho...@fucit.org>.
: Why should an issue be closed just because it's been open for N years?
...
: Why do we care about the number of open issues? Who is using this metric?
+1
Using a filter of "has not been modified in X days" to help find issues
that are *likeley* no longer relevant seems fine, and then they can
quickly be reviewed/closed if they are about code that no longer exists,
or have already been implemented/fixed in another way.
but arbitrarily deciding an issue should be closed just becuase it's old
doesn't really make sense to me to me.
-Hoss
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: JIRA cleanup inactive issues?
Posted by Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>.
On Feb 14, 2013, at 9:00 AM, Michael McCandless <lu...@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
> I think people who
> care about the number of open issues should actually look, issue by
> issue, and make a call.
+1
- Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: JIRA cleanup inactive issues?
Posted by Michael McCandless <lu...@mikemccandless.com>.
Why should an issue be closed just because it's been open for N years?
It can easily be a real issue, just low priority. Eg likely many GSoC
tagged issues fall into this category.
I don't think we should do any bulk actions here: I think people who
care about the number of open issues should actually look, issue by
issue, and make a call.
Why do we care about the number of open issues? Who is using this metric?
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikemccandless.com
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 6:13 AM, Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> JIRA currently has 739 Open, Unresolved issues, with no activity for >1year, which makes it difficult to get an overview over REAL issues.
> The oldest of these, SOLR-36, have not been touched since July 2006 and is probably not valid anymore.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20in%20(SOLR%2C%20LUCENE)%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Open%20AND%20updated%20%3C%3D%20-365d%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20ASC
>
> How about bulk updating all issues that have been inactive for >1year, encouraging creator to either close it or bring it up to date? If the comment includes a unique tag, we can later select those same issues which have still not seen activity within the next month or so, and bulk-close them. They will still be possible to revive if someone wants to.
>
> The idea is that people who have been involved with the issue in the past would get a notification email. Problem is that will generate 739 "spam" mails on this mailing list, but it's perhaps worth it? We could turn off notifications, but then we'd not get the "ping" effect to those not following the list closely.
>
> What do you think?
>
> --
> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
> Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org