"Kathey Marsden (JIRA)" <[email protected]> writes: > [ > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1252?page=comments#action_12425609 > ] > > Kathey Marsden commented on DERBY-1252: > --------------------------------------- > > now that this is fixed , is there still existing application impact? > If not then we should uncheck the box. "Existing application > impact" should a field users can query on to see if there have been > changes that might affect their application. Once a regression is > fixed it can be unchecked if there is nothing that remains that > might impact users.
Yes, I was wondering about that.. For "regression" I guess one could argue that these flags are a characteristic of the bug, and should be left, and that, being closed, the problem is gone as well. "Application impact" seems more belonging to the solution, and then it gets muddy.. I agree it is more useful (and workable) to let both flags reflect the current state of the issue (as we do for patch available). I checked http://db.apache.org/derby/binaries/FilingDerbyIssuesInJira.doc for explanation of how these fields should be used but didn't find anything. Does anyone know if is it explained elsewhere? If not, I think it would be good up update the document. Thanks, Dag
