You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openjpa.apache.org by Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> on 2009/01/30 22:48:08 UTC
OPENJPA-772 and OPENJPA-882 ready for review
I have attached patches to both JIRAs and unassigned them from me, but
thought I'd drop a note to everyone as there is no "Patch Available"
field like we used in Geronimo to denote JIRAs from contributors that
were ready for review.
-Donald
Re: OPENJPA-772 and OPENJPA-882 ready for review
Posted by Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com>.
That's probably it. Sadly I don't appear to have sufficient karma to change
the schemes. Craig or Kevin do either of you have the proper authority?
-mike
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> wrote:
> Might be because you're using the Default Issue Type Schema instead of the
> Apache Default Schema....
>
>
> -Donald
>
>
>
> Michael Dick wrote:
>
>> I've thought that having a patch available field / phase / whatever would
>> be
>> helpful.
>>
>> Any ideas how / where we go to add it?
>>
>> -mike
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> I have attached patches to both JIRAs and unassigned them from me, but
>>> thought I'd drop a note to everyone as there is no "Patch Available"
>>> field
>>> like we used in Geronimo to denote JIRAs from contributors that were
>>> ready
>>> for review.
>>>
>>>
>>> -Donald
>>>
>>>
>>
Re: OPENJPA-772 and OPENJPA-882 ready for review
Posted by Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org>.
Might be because you're using the Default Issue Type Schema instead of
the Apache Default Schema....
-Donald
Michael Dick wrote:
> I've thought that having a patch available field / phase / whatever would be
> helpful.
>
> Any ideas how / where we go to add it?
>
> -mike
>
> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I have attached patches to both JIRAs and unassigned them from me, but
>> thought I'd drop a note to everyone as there is no "Patch Available" field
>> like we used in Geronimo to denote JIRAs from contributors that were ready
>> for review.
>>
>>
>> -Donald
>>
>
Re: OPENJPA-772 and OPENJPA-882 ready for review
Posted by Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com>.
I've thought that having a patch available field / phase / whatever would be
helpful.
Any ideas how / where we go to add it?
-mike
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org> wrote:
> I have attached patches to both JIRAs and unassigned them from me, but
> thought I'd drop a note to everyone as there is no "Patch Available" field
> like we used in Geronimo to denote JIRAs from contributors that were ready
> for review.
>
>
> -Donald
>
Re: OPENJPA-772 and OPENJPA-882 ready for review
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
Hi David,
I don't know if you are allowed to see it, but here is the list of all
workflows implemented by Apache JIRA:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/admin/ViewWorkflowSchemes.jspa
I didn't notice it until now, but the only projects using the Geronimo
workflow are
Re: OPENJPA-772 and OPENJPA-882 ready for review
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
On Jan 30, 2009, at 4:54 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
> Looking at JIRA, the Geronimo workflow implements a Review-Then-
> Commit workflow, which isn't what we want.
Somethings wrong here.... we haven't had review-then-commit for a long
time and I don't think jira was enforcing it.
>
>
> The only suitable workflow seems to be no-reopen-closed, patch-avail
> workflow that, as its name suggests, makes two changes to the
> standard workflow:
>
> It does not permit closed bugs to be re-opened, encouraging the
> filing of new bugs; and it adds a "patch available" status.
Preventing reopening closed bugs is dumb IMNSHO :-) unless you can
edit everything about a closed bug. Otherwise the fixed in and
component fields are almost certain to be wrong on many many bugs.
>
>
> Is this a change that the community wants to make? Or is a note
> dropped to the dev list enough, as Donald has done?
I don't know how geronimo got its patch available checkbox but since
we have it and can reopen bugs.... there must be a way you can too :-)
thanks
david jencks
>
>
> Craig
>
> On Jan 30, 2009, at 1:48 PM, Donald Woods wrote:
>
>> I have attached patches to both JIRAs and unassigned them from me,
>> but thought I'd drop a note to everyone as there is no "Patch
>> Available" field like we used in Geronimo to denote JIRAs from
>> contributors that were ready for review.
>>
>>
>> -Donald
>
> Craig L Russell
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
Re: OPENJPA-772 and OPENJPA-882 ready for review
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
Looking at JIRA, the Geronimo workflow implements a Review-Then-Commit
workflow, which isn't what we want.
The only suitable workflow seems to be no-reopen-closed, patch-avail
workflow that, as its name suggests, makes two changes to the standard
workflow:
It does not permit closed bugs to be re-opened, encouraging the filing
of new bugs; and it adds a "patch available" status.
Is this a change that the community wants to make? Or is a note
dropped to the dev list enough, as Donald has done?
Craig
On Jan 30, 2009, at 1:48 PM, Donald Woods wrote:
> I have attached patches to both JIRAs and unassigned them from me,
> but thought I'd drop a note to everyone as there is no "Patch
> Available" field like we used in Geronimo to denote JIRAs from
> contributors that were ready for review.
>
>
> -Donald
Craig L Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!