Yes we do close JIRA issues that are not relevant or the problem mentioned is already fixed by other issue
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 9:12 PM Sergio Kef <sergio...@gmail.com> wrote: > On a slightly irrelevant note, do we ever close tickets as non-reproducable > or will-not-fix? > Last time I was going through open tickets I found dozens that seemed > really old, really not-gonna-happen or already fixed. > What actions could we take to decrease this gap? > WDYT? > > S. > > On Mon, 18 Nov 2019 at 21:25, Tomasz Urbaszek <tomasz.urbas...@polidea.com > > > wrote: > > > I can agree that GitHub issues may get spammy but I other projects deal > > with it somehow. And as a user I like the simplicity of creating an > issue. > > As per Jira, I think a good part of it is the ability to link issues > across > > different ASF project (but I don't think it's a killer feature). > > > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 9:12 PM Bolke de Bruin <bdbr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > I don’t like Jira particularly but I like GitHub issues even less. Both > > > don’t feel right. And yes GitHub issues get spammy very quickly. The > > hurdle > > > gets so low that it functions as an alternative to the mailing list, > far, > > > and chat. > > > > > > > > > On 18 November 2019 at 21:05:38, Ash Berlin-Taylor (a...@apache.org) > > wrote: > > > > > > Getting creds for Jira might be tricky, though Infra may have some way > of > > > resolving issues when PR is merged (please don't Close, only ever > Resolve > > > as closed issues can't have FixVersion changed) > > > > > > This brings me on to another question: what do were actual use Jira for > > > that couldn't (or shouldn't) be done with GitHub Issues? > > > > > > The main thing I can think of right now is the Fix version when > resolving > > > to say when we should backport a PR, but this could be achieved with > > > Milestones in GitHub. > > > > > > (A fringe benefit is that most people won't have an ASF Jira account so > > > opening issues to ask questions is harder. "Benefit" as it avoids issue > > > spam for question.) > > > > > > Is there anything else? > > > > > > -A > > > > > > On 18 November 2019 18:27:16 GMT, Tomasz Urbaszek < > > > tomasz.urbas...@polidea.com> wrote: > > > >Is there any possibility to use GitHub actions for that? > > > >For example, the one that allows to "Automatically transition an issue > > > >to > > > >done when a pull request whose name contains the issue key is merged"? > > > >Here is Atlassian repo: https://github.com/atlassian/gajira > > > > > > > >Bests, > > > >Tomek > > > > > > > > > > > >On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 7:22 PM Bolke de Bruin <bdbr...@gmail.com> > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > >> I wrote that script. It’s cli only unfortunately. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On 18 November 2019 at 18:22:04, Dan Davydov > > > >(ddavy...@twitter.com.invalid > > > >> ) > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Wait this doesn't happen automatically!? I thought way-back-when > > > >someone > > > >> wrote a script to automatically close the JIRA tickets (maybe that > > > >script > > > >> is not run when changes are merged via the UI). My apologies, will > > > >close > > > >> JIRAs in the future, I don't think I've closed any JIRA tickets > > > >manually. > > > >> > > > >> On Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 5:14 AM Jarek Potiuk > > > ><jarek.pot...@polidea.com> > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > And yes. I was one of the culprits - I saw :(. Sorry about that > > > >Kaxil. > > > >> > Just hope we can streamline this :). > > > >> > > > > >> > On Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 10:12 AM Jarek Potiuk > > > ><jarek.pot...@polidea.com> > > > >> > wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > Heartily agree with it ! > > > >> > > > > > >> > > I try always to close the PRs but sometimes I got distracted and > > > >forget > > > >> > to > > > >> > > resolve an issue - it happend several times that I recalled it > > > >few > > > >> hours > > > >> > > later that I have forgotten to resolve it. I hope it happens > > > >rarely - > > > >> I'd > > > >> > > love to know if I was one of the culprits here :). And whenever > I > > > >> noticed > > > >> > > some of the PRs are not closed but PR is merged by someone else > - > > > >I > > > >> > > sometimes close them. But it's not ideal of course. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > However simple it is - I think we are just humans and we will > > > >forget > > > >> from > > > >> > > time to time. I was wondering if we can (yes, you guessed it) > > > >automate > > > >> it > > > >> > > :). Either with JIRA/Github integration or some automated tool > to > > > >do it > > > >> > > regularly and resolving all already merged tickets. And the more > > > >> > > committers we are going to have, the more it makes sense to > > > >automate > > > >> some > > > >> > > of the work. The less you have to remember about your "chores" > > > >the more > > > >> > you > > > >> > > can focus on the "real" stuff. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > I think there are a few unwritten rules that we have - like what > > > >> version > > > >> > > to set when we cherry-pick change to 1.10* . My understanding is > > > >that > > > >> we > > > >> > > should set fixed version to the first unreleased yet 1.10. > > > >version. > > > >> This > > > >> > > problem will soon be gone, so maybe it's not worth solving it. > > > >There > > > >> are > > > >> > > also some edge cases like bad fixes which got reverted and > > > >reapplied > > > >> but > > > >> > I > > > >> > > think other than that the automation of it can be rather simple. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > And I think there are some scripts in "dev" that already do some > > > >of > > > >> that > > > >> > - > > > >> > > synchronising merges with JIRAs (but I don't think it's common > > > >> knowledge > > > >> > > and it's not regularly run). Maybe we can improve it somehow and > > > >have > > > >> it > > > >> > > fully automated so that we do not even havet to think about it ? > > > >> > > > > > >> > > WDYT? Any ideas? > > > >> > > > > > >> > > J. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 1:19 AM Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@gmail.com > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> > >> We have some at > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Committers%27+Guide > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> The person who merges the PR to master is the one who would be > > > >> > responsible > > > >> > >> for resolving the JIRA issue as they can add the *target > > > >version* > > > >> based > > > >> > on > > > >> > >> what they think after reviewing the PR. > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> On Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 12:12 AM Aizhamal Nurmamat kyzy < > > > >> > >> aizha...@apache.org> > > > >> > >> wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > I think it will be good to document the process. For example, > > > >who is > > > >> > >> > responsible for closing Jira issues: folks who closed PR's or > > > >the > > > >> ones > > > >> > >> who > > > >> > >> > opened? > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > If the documentation already exists, let's bring it back to > > > >> attention. > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 4:06 PM Kaxil Naik > > > ><kaxiln...@gmail.com> > > > >> > wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > Hi Committers, > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > Please make sure to close the Jira issues if the related > PRs > > > >are > > > >> > >> merged. > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > I am going through the Jira Reports (Image: > > > >> > https://imgur.com/n50Ticx > > > >> > >> ) > > > >> > >> > and > > > >> > >> > > was concerned with the gap between issues created & > resolved > > > >in > > > >> > recent > > > >> > >> > > months. > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > However, I noticed while going through the jira issues that > > > >most > > > >> of > > > >> > >> the > > > >> > >> > PRs > > > >> > >> > > related to the JIRAs have been resolved but the JIRA is not > > > >> > resolved. > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > Let's try to resolve all the issues when we merge the PR :) > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > This will help the release manager too. > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > Regards, > > > >> > >> > > Kaxil > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > -- > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Jarek Potiuk > > > >> > > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software > Engineer > > > >> > > > > > >> > > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129> > > > >> > > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > -- > > > >> > > > > >> > Jarek Potiuk > > > >> > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer > > > >> > > > > >> > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129> > > > >> > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > > > > > > > >Tomasz Urbaszek > > > >Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Junior Software Engineer > > > > > > > >M: +48 505 628 493 <+48505628493> > > > >E: tomasz.urbas...@polidea.com <tomasz.urbasz...@polidea.com> > > > > > > > >Unique Tech > > > >Check out our projects! <https://www.polidea.com/our-work> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Tomasz Urbaszek > > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Junior Software Engineer > > > > M: +48 505 628 493 <+48505628493> > > E: tomasz.urbas...@polidea.com <tomasz.urbasz...@polidea.com> > > > > Unique Tech > > Check out our projects! <https://www.polidea.com/our-work> > > >
