Is it possible there are 2100 of these? I did the below JIRA query, only in the Solr project, looking for Resolved or Closed issues with fixVersion of "master", but not with fixVersion of 6.0 nor 6.1, resolved before 8 Apr 2016 (the release date of Lucene/Solr 6).
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-7712?jql=project%20%3D%20SOLR%20AND%20status%20in%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20master%20AND%20fixVersion%20!%3D%206.0%20AND%20fixVersion%20!%3D%206.1%20AND%20resolved%20%3C%20%222016%2F04%2F08%22 (Obviously this misses Lucene issues, but I assume a similar strategy would apply. Also, we may want to shift the date back to the cutting of the 6_x branch.) It seems it would be easier to make some sort of "rename master" sort of change and go back and fix the ones that shouldn't be changed because they have been finished post-6.0 release, but I'm not seeing a good way to make a single query for those. Additionally, and sadly, in JIRA any bulk update to a field overwrites the existing value in the field. So if the fixVersion is "master" and "5.3", then doing a bulk update to "master" only would remove "5.3". So, yeah, what you guys said - it's not going to be super-easy. On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Anshum Gupta <[email protected]> wrote: > Should've replied to this thread ! I've been seeing those as part of the > 5.5.1 back ports and it confuses me every now and then. > > It should've been handled with the 6.0 release so I wasn't sure how to > handle those so I've been adding the 6.0 fix version to places where I've > found them but I should've removed the 'master' tag. > I'll help with the manual auditing and fixing of this once I have the 5.5.1 > RC1 later today. > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Chris Hostetter <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> >> Wow ... ok ... so no responses / opinions other then miller, eh? >> >> Thats fine ... slience == compliance i guess. >> >> I don't see much choice at this point other then a bunch of manual clean >> up. I'll try to find some time to take a stab at this at some point in >> the future i guess, not sure when. I'll reply back to this thread if i >> do, if anyone else beats me to it please reply here as well so we aren't >> wasting eachothers time. >> >> >> >> : Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 00:15:11 +0000 >> : From: Mark Miller <[email protected]> >> : Reply-To: [email protected] >> : To: Lucene Dev <[email protected]> >> : Subject: Re: post-branch_6x Jira version renaming(s) got overlooked? >> : >> : Yeah, sorry, I saw this too. People kept making 6 and 6.0 releases in >> JIRA >> : during 5x. A couple times I removed them because trunk or master is >> : supposed to be renamed when we release. But those versions kept getting >> : created again. I figured the rollover was not done right, but with no >> other >> : complaints I did not really look. Some people with JiRa admin power had >> : different ideas. >> : On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 6:40 PM Chris Hostetter >> <[email protected]> >> : wrote: >> : >> : > >> : > I just noticed that most of the (older) jira's listed in 6.0's >> CHANGES.txt >> : > files are still showing up in Jira as being fixed in "master" >> : > >> : > Examples... >> : > >> : > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5950 >> : > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6631 >> : > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3085 >> : > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-7560 >> : > >> : > Only some of the more recent issues, that were resolved after >> branch_6x / >> : > (and/or branch_6_0) was created, thus people deliberately backported >> : > and deliberately marked them as fixed in 6.0 have the newer "6.0" fix >> : > version... >> : > >> : > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7056 >> : > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8831 >> : > >> : > my recollection is that part of the release process for creating a new >> X.0 >> : > release is to rename the "master" version in Jira to "X.0" and re-add >> a >> : > new "master" version -- but it looks like that never happened for 6.0 >> (is >> : > it not documented as part of the release process?) and insstead >> entirely >> : > new "6.0" jira versions were added. >> : > >> : > In any case: it seems like we now need to bulk edit *most* of the >> : > issues currently labeled "Fixed: master" in both the LUCENE and SOLR >> jira >> : > projects, so they are "Fixed: 6.0" (i say *most* because obviously >> we'll >> : > need to audit the issues resolved & committed only to master after the >> : > 6x branch was created and leave them alone) .. sound right? >> : > >> : > (we probably shouldn't remove/replace the existing "6.0" versions in >> : > Jira, because we already have issues marked as "Affects: 6.0") >> : > >> : > Or am i completley missunderstanding the situation? >> : > >> : > >> : > -Hoss >> : > http://www.lucidworks.com/ >> : > >> : > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> : > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> : > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> : > >> : > -- >> : - Mark >> : about.me/markrmiller >> : >> >> -Hoss >> http://www.lucidworks.com/ >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > > > -- > Anshum Gupta --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
