You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@jackrabbit.apache.org by Ard Schrijvers <a....@onehippo.com> on 2012/05/25 12:05:37 UTC
Moving OCM issues to backlog version
Is everybody ok if I add a new version 'Backlog' for the OCM project,
and move all current 'unscheduled', mainly very old, issues to it?
I'll see which items I can pick up for the upcoming version. Also, if
they look really outdated, I'd like to close them.
please let me know if you do not agree with / like this
Regards Ard
--
Amsterdam - Oosteinde 11, 1017 WT Amsterdam
Boston - 1 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02142
US +1 877 414 4776 (toll free)
Europe +31(0)20 522 4466
www.onehippo.com
Re: Moving OCM issues to backlog version
Posted by Ard Schrijvers <a....@onehippo.com>.
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Ard Schrijvers
> <a....@onehippo.com> wrote:
>> Let's see what others prefer
>
> I generally find that sorting open issues by the last update is enough
> to filter out old and inactive issues. The other alternatives are
> either quickly outdated (who'll take care of updating the list of
> "backlog" issues over time?) or incorrect (inactivity does not
> necessarily mean an issue is resolved or no longer relevant). The best
> way to deal with old issues is for someone to actually spend a few
> minutes per issue to review what's the current status and update or
> resolve the issue accordingly. Until someone has the time and energy
> for that I'd rather just leave the issues untouched.
>
> Anyway, given that you're the first one to seriously use the OCM
> tracker for a while, I'd say whatever works for you is best. :-)
I'll go through all open issues, close them if needed, and if still
relevant, leave them as is
Regards Ard
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
--
Amsterdam - Oosteinde 11, 1017 WT Amsterdam
Boston - 1 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02142
US +1 877 414 4776 (toll free)
Europe +31(0)20 522 4466
www.onehippo.com
Re: Moving OCM issues to backlog version
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Ard Schrijvers
<a....@onehippo.com> wrote:
> Let's see what others prefer
I generally find that sorting open issues by the last update is enough
to filter out old and inactive issues. The other alternatives are
either quickly outdated (who'll take care of updating the list of
"backlog" issues over time?) or incorrect (inactivity does not
necessarily mean an issue is resolved or no longer relevant). The best
way to deal with old issues is for someone to actually spend a few
minutes per issue to review what's the current status and update or
resolve the issue accordingly. Until someone has the time and energy
for that I'd rather just leave the issues untouched.
Anyway, given that you're the first one to seriously use the OCM
tracker for a while, I'd say whatever works for you is best. :-)
BR,
Jukka Zitting
Re: Moving OCM issues to backlog version
Posted by Ard Schrijvers <a....@onehippo.com>.
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Bart van der Schans
<b....@onehippo.com> wrote:
> Or just add a comment "Closing since there was no activity for over 6
> months. Please reopen the issue if this is still relevant to you." and
> then close the issues. I'm personally not a big fan of keeping a big
> bag of open issues in a backlog. You will end up going over and over
> again through the backlog issues to find the relevant ones.
I am fine with that as well. I just wanna get a clean sheet to start
with and not have the obfuscating old issues from a couple of years
ago.
Let's see what others prefer
Regards Ard
>
> Regards,
> Bart
>
> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Ard Schrijvers
> <a....@onehippo.com> wrote:
>> Is everybody ok if I add a new version 'Backlog' for the OCM project,
>> and move all current 'unscheduled', mainly very old, issues to it?
>> I'll see which items I can pick up for the upcoming version. Also, if
>> they look really outdated, I'd like to close them.
>>
>> please let me know if you do not agree with / like this
>>
>> Regards Ard
>>
>> --
>> Amsterdam - Oosteinde 11, 1017 WT Amsterdam
>> Boston - 1 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02142
>>
>> US +1 877 414 4776 (toll free)
>> Europe +31(0)20 522 4466
>> www.onehippo.com
>
>
>
> --
> Amsterdam - Oosteinde 11, 1017 WT Amsterdam
> Boston - 1 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02142
>
> US +1 877 414 4776 (toll free)
> Europe +31(0)20 522 4466
> www.onehippo.com
--
Amsterdam - Oosteinde 11, 1017 WT Amsterdam
Boston - 1 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02142
US +1 877 414 4776 (toll free)
Europe +31(0)20 522 4466
www.onehippo.com
Re: Moving OCM issues to backlog version
Posted by Bart van der Schans <b....@onehippo.com>.
Or just add a comment "Closing since there was no activity for over 6
months. Please reopen the issue if this is still relevant to you." and
then close the issues. I'm personally not a big fan of keeping a big
bag of open issues in a backlog. You will end up going over and over
again through the backlog issues to find the relevant ones.
Regards,
Bart
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Ard Schrijvers
<a....@onehippo.com> wrote:
> Is everybody ok if I add a new version 'Backlog' for the OCM project,
> and move all current 'unscheduled', mainly very old, issues to it?
> I'll see which items I can pick up for the upcoming version. Also, if
> they look really outdated, I'd like to close them.
>
> please let me know if you do not agree with / like this
>
> Regards Ard
>
> --
> Amsterdam - Oosteinde 11, 1017 WT Amsterdam
> Boston - 1 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02142
>
> US +1 877 414 4776 (toll free)
> Europe +31(0)20 522 4466
> www.onehippo.com
--
Amsterdam - Oosteinde 11, 1017 WT Amsterdam
Boston - 1 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02142
US +1 877 414 4776 (toll free)
Europe +31(0)20 522 4466
www.onehippo.com