On 9/16/07, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sep 15, 2007, at 12:21 PM, Karan Malhi wrote: > > > Here is part 3 again: > > 3. "B" commits the change and fixes the issue. Now "B" wants to close > > the issue, > > a. Is it a requirement by JIRA or OpenEJB that "B" has to assign > > the issue to himself first before closing it ? > > b. If not, then what is the value behind "B" (or somebody else) > > assigning an issue > > to "B" and then closing it (I think I have seen something similar > > being done in past when I used to contribute a patch, a committer > > would first assign the issue to me, commit and close the issue) > > I typically assign the issue to whomever did or is doing the work so > they get proper credit/praise.
I usually assign a issue with a waiting patch to me before committing the patch and while closing the issue I mention the patch providers name in the comment. The reason is that while I was still a contributor (on Geronimo) I used to unassign issue after I posted a patch so that a committer can pick it up. From now on I will assign the issue to the patch provider so that they get the credit and it will be more helpful in recognizing contributors who can considered for committership. That's typically going to be me or a contributor who can't yet commit/ > close. Rare occasion I close an issue someone else worked on and > forget to close -- which is sometimes also me :) > > When closing umbrella/parent issues with lot's of little sub issues, > I sometimes leave them unassigned as typically it was so much of a > group effort there's no need to give "overall" credit. > > -David > >
