+1 >For us normally resolved issues will always have a development version as >"Fix Versions" field, so the issue will only be closed when the version >that includes that issue (bug, feature or whatever) actually gets released.
I think it should be optional as Davor suggested because you don't always want to fix all open issues in the next release. On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 10:58 PM, Amit Sela <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 12:04 AM Lukasz Cwik <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Kenneth Knowles <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > +1 >> > >> > On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 12:06 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > +1 >> > > >> > > Regards >> > > JB >> > > >> > > >> > > On 06/28/2016 01:01 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: >> > > >> > >> Hi everyone, >> > >> I'd like to propose a simple change in Beam JIRA that will hopefully >> > >> improve our issue and version tracking -- to actually use the "Fix >> > >> Versions" field as intended [1]. >> > >> >> > >> The goal would be to simplify issue tracking, streamline generation of >> > >> release notes, add a view of outstanding work towards a release, and >> > >> clearly communicate which Beam version contains fixes for each issue. >> > >> >> > >> The standard usage of the field is: >> > >> * For open (or in-progress/re-opened) issues, "Fix Versions" field is >> > >> optional and indicates an unreleased version that this issue is >> > targeting. >> > >> The release is not expected to proceed unless this issue is fixed, or >> > the >> > >> field is changed. >> > >> * For closed (or resolved) issues, "Fix Versions" field indicates a >> > >> released or unreleased version that has the fix. >> > >> >> > >> I think the field should be mandatory once the issue is >> resolved/closed >> > >> [4], so we make a deliberate choice about this. I propose we use "Not >> > >> applicable" for all those issues that aren't being resolved as Fixed >> > >> (e.g., >> > >> duplicates, working as intended, invalid, etc.) and those that aren't >> > >> released (e.g., website, build system, etc.). >> > >> >> > >> We can then trivially view outstanding work for the next release [2], >> or >> > >> generate release notes [3]. >> > >> >> > >> I'd love to hear if there are any comments! I know that at least JB >> > >> agrees, >> > >> as he was convincing me on this -- thanks ;). >> > >> >> > >> Thanks, >> > >> Davor >> > >> >> > >> [1] >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> https://confluence.atlassian.com/adminjiraserver071/managing-versions-802592484.html >> > >> [2] >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM/fixforversion/12335766/?selectedTab=com.atlassian.jira.jira-projects-plugin:version-summary-panel >> > >> [3] >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12335764 >> > >> [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-12120 >> > >> >> > >> >> > > -- >> > > Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> > > [email protected] >> > > http://blog.nanthrax.net >> > > Talend - http://www.talend.com >> > > >> > >>
