Myrna van Lunteren <[email protected]> writes: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Kathey Marsden > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 6/20/2011 12:29 PM, Mike Matrigali wrote: >>> >>> If you determine an issue is not appropriate for backport could you >>> mark the JIRA issue. Kathey came up with standard for this during >>> the last backport effort. >>> >> The issues rejected for backport can be marked with the labels >> derby_backport_reject_<version> e.g. derby_backport_reject_10_8 >> >> where <version> is the highest version where backport was rejected. >> So, if we decided a fix does not make sense to backport to 10.8, >> It would be labelled derby_backport_reject_10_8. >> >> >> Then the labels can be used in Jira queries, for example: >> project = DERBY AND labels not in (derby_backport_reject_10_8) and >> resolution = fixed AND fixVersion not in ("10.8.1.2","10.8.1.4","10.8.2.0") >> and fixVersion in ("10.9.0.0") >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/sr/jira.issueviews:searchrequest-printable/temp/SearchRequest.html?jqlQuery=project+%3D+DERBY+AND+labels+not+in+%28derby_backport_reject_10_8%29++and+resolution+%3D+fixed++AND+fixVersion+not+in+%28%2210.8.1.2%22%2C%2210.8.1.4%22%2C%2210.8.2.0%22%29+and+fixVersion+in+%28%2210.9.0.0%22%29&tempMax=1000 >> >> >> > > Thanks for the info, derby_backport_reject_10_8 sounds like the thing > to use. Sometimes though even if the fix for the issue is not suitable > for backport, it may still be feasible to backport a new test.
The list of issues you wanted feedback on contained many improvements, not only bug fixes. Should we mark issues that implement new features with derby_backport_reject_10_8, or would it be sufficient to use the label on bug fixes that shouldn't be backported? (I think previous backporting efforts have focused on issues reported as bugs.) -- Knut Anders
