On 09/28/2012 02:31 PM, Liviu Nicoara wrote:
On 09/28/12 16:21, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 09/28/2012 11:55 AM, Liviu Nicoara wrote:
On 09/28/12 13:51, Martin Sebor wrote:
[...]
One other comment: I would suggest choosing subjects for bug
reports that reflect the problem rather than a fix for it or
a rationale for it. For STDCXX-1066 I think something like
"Library mutex objects misaligned on SPARCV8" would better
capture the problem than the current title. (It's also up
to us to rename an issue if we find it more descriptive
than the original.)
I can't do that myself. I looked at that and 1056 and there is no button
for me to reopen, or to edit stuff which is not mine.
What you can do with an issue is determined by your Jira role
and the Jira permission scheme for the project. Your roles are
Committer and PMC member.
Both Committers and PMC members (and pretty much all other
roles) have the Resolve Issues Permission:
Ability to resolve and reopen issues. This includes the ability
to set a fix version.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/project-config/STDCXX/permissions
So you should be able to reopen it. The top of the STDCXX-1066
page should look similar to what's in the attachment screenshot.
I.e., you should see a Reopen Issue button near the top, just
to the right of the |Comment|Voters|Watch Issue|More Actions|
tabs. If that's not what you see, we should figure out why.
One reason would be if you were logged in with a different user
id, e.g., if you had more than one account. I checked and you
do seem to have two accounts. One with your old Rogue Wave
address, and another @hates.ms. I couldn't tell which address
was used on the People admin page (Jira just shows the user
name), so I removed and re-added you with the current email
address. Let me know if that didn't clear things up.
Thanks, that did it! Now I see the `Reopen' button on both incidents.
Great!
So, to recap, just to make sure I got it correctly: you want me to
re-open them, update them, and close the new ones as duplicates. Did I
get this right?
It was a suggestion, not a request :) I'd probably reopen
STDCXX-1066 and close it as a duplicate of the new one you
created (since you're happy with it). But you should feel
free to do whatever makes the most sense to you.
Martin
Thanks,
Liviu
