Hossman is the only one that can swear more and get away with it. Pact with
the devil or something.
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 8:41 AM Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Joining the conversation late here.
>
> I've been using fixVersion 6.x in the honest belief that:
> * that was the done thing (and now i know that it isn't, oops)
> * what is displayed as 6.x now will in future become 6.6 (when 6.6 is
> released) or it will stay 6.x (if there is no 6.6 release)
> * if a 6.x label exists then it can and even should be used (that is not
> so)
>
> Thanks for bringing this up and for fixing the mislabeled issues.
>
> Going forward I'm happy to keep an eye on this type of thing though I
> won't be able to match others on the "would have sworn more" style point
> you mention.
>
> Christine
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> At: 04/14/17 17:22:44
>
> 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

Reply via email to