+1. It would be good to have a default field probably as well ? I would also want to have the fixVersion having default field and the release manager accordingly triaging it. I recently saw some of my bugs missed this information and the UI team didn't notice it.
On 05/08/13 12:57 PM, "Ram Ganesh" <ram.gan...@citrix.com> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Prasanna Santhanam [mailto:t...@apache.org] >> Sent: 02 August 2013 23:36 >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [jira] make affectedVersion field mandatory..... >> >> On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 11:06:53AM +0000, Ram Ganesh wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > While triaging bugs I noticed that many bugs had affectedVersion field >> > as empty. This makes it difficult to guess the version/release the >> > reporter was on while filing the bug. Can we make the affectedVersion >> > field a mandatory field instead? >> >> Indeed this would be nice to have. But the reason I think we are not >>seeing it >> is not knowing what the affectsVersion should be. >> >> Bugs are coming from: >> >> 1) Users reporting from the field >> 2) QA filing bugs from jenkins builds >> 3) Bugs encountered on master faced by those working on code >> >> Those in 1) usually add the information to their description. But could >>use a >> command line method to extract this information to make reports clearer. >> Alex made an enhancement to add this to the jar's manifest. But it's >>still not >> something that can be extracted easily. >> >> Those in 2) don't know if an unreleased -SNAPSHOT version of the build >> would need to be put in the affectsVersion and if so what the HEAD of >>the >> build is. Again a tool would help. Because one who fixes the bug will >>almost >> *always* need the commit-sha1, without which reproducing the bug can be >> tough. >> >> and those in 3) don't have any option on JIRA so I've started to set >> affectsVersion to 'Future' to denote master and add the HEAD of my repo >>in >> the description. I notice these can get improperly triaged. > >Prasanna, > >For starters one need to populate just the release numbers like 4.1. or >4.2 or 4.2+( if it is from master and release number is still agreed on). > I am sure users would know the specific release number the problem was >noticed. > > >> >> -- >> Prasanna., >> >> ------------------------ >> Powered by BigRock.com >
