Rick Hillegas wrote:
That leaves one last unassigned blocker:
I think two new issues DERBY-1569 and DERBY-1564 look potentially
*very* problematic and may quite possibly be serious regressions.
We also have two known regressions[1]. If I would vote -1 on the
release if any of these are not resolved, should I mark them fix
version 10.2? Do I mark them BLOCKER or Critical even though that
doesn't match the Jira description of these fields [2]?
Of course there is still the outstanding issue of what 10.2 fixin means
for unassigned issues we talked in this thread"
http://www.nabble.com/prioritized-10.2-bug-list-tf1932945.html#a5301968
Does that approach seem reasonable? If so I can put it on the Wiki.
Alternately we could just not muddy the Jira descriptions of these
fields and only mark only mark Fix Version 10.2 for an unassigned if we
would vote -1 on the release if it is not fixed, mark the priorities
objectively based on the Jira priority descriptions[2 ] and use the
Wiki or some other mechanism for community bug review and identification
of high value fixes.
Thanks for the help in understanding what to do here.
Kathey
[1] Known Regressions
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&&pid=10594&resolution=-1&customfield_12310090=Regression&sorter/field=issuekey&sorter/order=DESC
[2] Jira field descriptions (really more severity)
http://issues.apache.org/jira/ShowConstantsHelp.jspa?decorator=popup#PriorityLevels
[3] Current 10.2 unassigned issues (76) - I think this list means
nothing at all right now because nobody is answering the same question.
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&&pid=10594&resolution=-1&fixfor=11187&assigneeSelect=unassigned&sorter/field=issuekey&sorter/order=ASC&sorter/field=updated&sorter/order=DESC&sorter/field=priority&sorter/order=DESCrg/jira/secure/ConfigureReport.jspa?filterid=12310892
