I'm also +1 to removing PMC group - I checked and every permission PMC group has, administrators also have so consolidating those 2 groups should have no impact on people.
I'd be happy to have admin access, and I will help keep my eyes out for problems like this in the future. On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 1:36 PM, Erick Erickson <[email protected]> wrote: > bq: my proposal would be to get rid of that PMC group (which is like > more admins), clear the admin group, and seed it with anyone that > calls out wanting access > > +1 > > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 10:45 AM, Mark Miller <[email protected]> wrote: >> bq. Personally I'm fine with not being an administrator as long as I can >> assign JIRAs to myself and resolve them. >> >> I think that is 80-90% of us. The only time I ever use admin is to fix >> version stuff like this or do a release. I think Jenkins access might work >> this way, you have to request it. It would also be great if like the >> committer role could manage versions, but I couldn't seem to find that >> feature. >> >> But anyway, my proposal would be to get rid of that PMC group (which is like >> more admins), clear the admin group, and seed it with anyone that calls out >> wanting access, and then give access as requested from there out, extra >> points for a warning about this 'feature' and managing versions consistently >> with the past unless there is discussion. >> >> - Mark >> >> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 1:06 PM Erick Erickson <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> I agree with all your points and would _much_ rather be unable to >>> screw up even if it meant jumping through another hoop on those rare >>> occasions when I needed more authority. >>> >>> Personally I'm fine with not being an administrator as long as I can >>> assign JIRAs to myself and resolve them. >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:34 AM, Mark Miller <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > The problem is not so much notifying people, because no one is closely >>> > monitoring this stuff. By the time we ever notice it and attempt to fix >>> > it, >>> > there are 40-200 issues involved. You are not the only one. And I would >>> > be >>> > angry at you! If not for the fact that it's a terrible JIRA issue that >>> > did >>> > not used to be a problem. But, ok, you have learned this JIRA 'feature' >>> > is a >>> > problem. What about those not reading this, what about future >>> > committers, >>> > what about you go away for a year and come back having forgotten. The >>> > JIRA >>> > issue to fix this in JIRA has tons of votes, but it's also old, so no >>> > help >>> > from Atlassian likely any time soon. You can read the comments on the >>> > bug >>> > report and lots of people have this problem and hate it. The devs doing >>> > it >>> > here are not special, that's obvious. >>> > >>> > I'm not sure why we have so many admins though. Sure, if you do a >>> > release, >>> > you want to be able to manage the versions, but a huge number of >>> > committers >>> > have not done a release and could request admin when needed. Then we >>> > could >>> > grant it, and be like, by the way, careful with your god like powers to >>> > create stuff out of thin air without realizing. >>> > >>> > Perhaps the other reason most might use admin power is to add someone, >>> > but I >>> > think only a subset of people do that as well currently. >>> > >>> > - Mark >>> > >>> > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 12:28 PM Erick Erickson >>> > <[email protected]> >>> > wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Hmmm, and come to think of it I'm pretty sure I resolved some "fix >>> >> versions" as "trunk", which is also incorrect. >>> >> >>> >> Well, now I know. >>> >> >>> >> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Erick Erickson >>> >> <[email protected]> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > If you look at the "history" tab on the JIRA you can see who set what >>> >> > values when. I checked 4-5 of the JIRAS and the person who set those >>> >> > has a long record of being very conscientious about changes so I'm >>> >> > certain it's just an awareness issue, at least for that person. I'll >>> >> > ping.... >>> >> > >>> >> > Which suggests a way to raise awareness going forward: check the >>> >> > history and send a message. >>> >> > >>> >> > If that doesn't cure it we can consider harsher measures, although I >>> >> > don't think forbidding arbitrary labels is "harsh", it's just too bad >>> >> > we can't. >>> >> > >>> >> > Erick >>> >> > >>> >> > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Mark Miller <[email protected]> >>> >> > wrote: >>> >> >> I wish hossman was still more active in this type of thing. He would >>> >> >> have >>> >> >> sworn more and fixed it more meticulously and probably earlier. Or >>> >> >> maybe he >>> >> >> is sick of it after last time. Anyway, I did what I could, preserved >>> >> >> the >>> >> >> proper versions I could, and it's clean again for now. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> I'm halfway serious about the admin thing given you can easily auto >>> >> >> create >>> >> >> components and versions by accident. Maybe instead of giving it to >>> >> >> everyone >>> >> >> by default, we should be doing it by request. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> - Mark >>> >> >> >>> >> >> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 10:29 AM Mark Miller <[email protected]> >>> >> >> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> Perhaps everyone doesn't need to be a JIRA admin? Like people that >>> >> >>> add >>> >> >>> new >>> >> >>> bad versions in the future ;) This is no fun to cleanup. >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> - Mark >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 10:23 AM Mark Miller >>> >> >>> <[email protected]> >>> >> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> Bummer, seems we can't lock this down :( >>> >> >>>> https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JRASERVER-42068 >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:42 AM Mark Miller >>> >> >>>> <[email protected]> >>> >> >>>> wrote: >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:37 AM Cassandra Targett >>> >> >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> I noticed these the other day also, and had an email half-wrote >>> >> >>>>>> that I >>> >> >>>>>> intended to finish up today. >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> To start, JIRA unfortunately makes this really easy to make a >>> >> >>>>>> mess >>> >> >>>>>> of >>> >> >>>>>> - if you can create or edit an issue, you can just pop in a new >>> >> >>>>>> value >>> >> >>>>>> that gets added to the list of open versions. Editing an issue >>> >> >>>>>> is >>> >> >>>>>> open >>> >> >>>>>> to lots of folks - committers, contributors, the reporter of an >>> >> >>>>>> issue. >>> >> >>>>>> So, we have high potential for this to be an ongoing problem. >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>> Ah, that makes this a lot less baffling I guess. >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> But, since only committers can commit patches and are thus the >>> >> >>>>>> usual >>> >> >>>>>> resolvers of an issue, committers either aren't paying enough >>> >> >>>>>> attention to that field when they resolve an issue or there is >>> >> >>>>>> confusion/difference of understanding about what that field is >>> >> >>>>>> supposed to mean. >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> There are currently 49 issues for Solr that have these >>> >> >>>>>> "non-standard" >>> >> >>>>>> versions [1]. Some date back before the most recent 6.5.0 >>> >> >>>>>> release, >>> >> >>>>>> which means there are issues fixed in 6.4 and 6.5 (at least) >>> >> >>>>>> which >>> >> >>>>>> don't say so in JIRA. >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> This could be really problematic going forward. We need to agree >>> >> >>>>>> that >>> >> >>>>>> when issues are resolved, the fixVersion field is reliable and >>> >> >>>>>> means >>> >> >>>>>> the same thing to everyone. >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>> +1! >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> IMO we should always use the *next* version that makes sense at >>> >> >>>>>> that >>> >> >>>>>> time. So, an issue resolved today would be "6.6" and "master >>> >> >>>>>> (7.0)". >>> >> >>>>>> Others may have different points of view on how we should do >>> >> >>>>>> this, >>> >> >>>>>> but >>> >> >>>>>> I think traditionally it's been the way I suggest, so if there >>> >> >>>>>> is >>> >> >>>>>> change desired there, we should discuss it. >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>> I agree. >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> Side note: I know there is some doubt today that 6.6 will ever >>> >> >>>>>> exist. >>> >> >>>>>> However, it will be a lot easier to go through JIRA to remove >>> >> >>>>>> "6.6" >>> >> >>>>>> from issues that aren't in 6.x than it will be to review >>> >> >>>>>> issue-by-issue everything that says "6x" or "6.x" or >>> >> >>>>>> "branch_6x", >>> >> >>>>>> etc., and figure out when it was actually released. >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>> +1. It also matches how we handle CHANGES afaict. >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>> I wish we could disable the auto creating of versions entirely >>> >> >>>>> somehow, >>> >> >>>>> but I guess the next best thing is to raise awareness. It's great >>> >> >>>>> to >>> >> >>>>> have >>> >> >>>>> the correct versions and in the correct ordering. >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>> - Mark >>> >> >>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> Cassandra >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> [1] Query for JIRA issues: >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20SOLR%20AND%20status%20in%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20(6.x%2C%206x%2C%20branch_6x) >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 1:33 AM, Mark Miller >>> >> >>>>>> <[email protected]> >>> >> >>>>>> wrote: >>> >> >>>>>> > Who keeps adding strange JIRA release versions? I've cleaned >>> >> >>>>>> > up >>> >> >>>>>> > strange ones >>> >> >>>>>> > in the past and they keep coming back. >>> >> >>>>>> > >>> >> >>>>>> > Why do we have branch6x, 6x and 6.x and trunk? >>> >> >>>>>> > >>> >> >>>>>> > Even if we wanted more than 6.1, 6.2, 6.2.1 and master (7.0), >>> >> >>>>>> > and >>> >> >>>>>> > I >>> >> >>>>>> > don't >>> >> >>>>>> > think we do, who keeps adding these duplicates? Let's come to >>> >> >>>>>> > some >>> >> >>>>>> > sanity >>> >> >>>>>> > here. >>> >> >>>>>> > >>> >> >>>>>> > - Mark >>> >> >>>>>> > -- >>> >> >>>>>> > - Mark >>> >> >>>>>> > about.me/markrmiller >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >> >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >> >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>>> -- >>> >> >>>>> - Mark >>> >> >>>>> about.me/markrmiller >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> -- >>> >> >>>> - Mark >>> >> >>>> about.me/markrmiller >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> -- >>> >> >>> - Mark >>> >> >>> about.me/markrmiller >>> >> >> >>> >> >> -- >>> >> >> - Mark >>> >> >> about.me/markrmiller >>> >> >>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >> >>> > -- >>> > - Mark >>> > about.me/markrmiller >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >> -- >> - Mark >> about.me/markrmiller > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
