This solution sounds viable to me… that way we maintain the original assignee as Rafal mentioned… I didn’t know it was easy to clone a ticket.
What do others think? Mark From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rafal Korytkowski Sent: Friday, February 03, 2012 2:26 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OPENMRS-DEV] JIRA: Awaiting Testing Verification state? Mark, you can create a new ticket for testing. To make it easier you could simply choose More Actions -> Clone and have a summary preceded with [TEST]. Such tickets should be linked as well. The problem with changing an assignee is that one need to look through ticket logs to figure out who wrote the code. -Rafal On 3 February 2012 18:48, Darius Jazayeri <[email protected]<mailto:djazayeri%[email protected]>> wrote: +0.25. Typically we don't have separate testers, so the state won't get used much. But in situations where we do have a separate testing team, it seems worth having. That said, when I've led a sprint where I want tickets to get out of the "needs review" box, but they shouldn't be Approved/Closed yet, I have labeled them as "passed-initial-review" (or something like that) and I configured the widgets on the dashboard to show "passed-initial-review" as done-for-purposes-of-the-sprint. (In this case I think it waiting for a second person to finish code review, after the first person had already approved the review.) -Darius On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Wyclif Luyima <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: +1 for that state, because tickets end up getting left in another state when actually we are waiting for the feature/bug to get tested. Wyclif On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Mark Goodrich <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: How would people feel about added an “Awaiting Vertification Testing” state to JIRA. This is an awkward name, but I’m sure someone besides me could come up with a better one… :) This state would fall between “Code-Review (Post-Commited)” and “Closed” state. There are two (similar) use cases here: 1) After code has been committed and reviewed, it is set to the Testing state for the original reporter to verify that it is fixed 2) After code has been committed and reviewed, it is set to the Testing state and assigned to a tester for verification This has come up because we’ve got a great volunteer tester here in the office, and I’ve been asking him to test and verify many of the features/bugs added/fixed during the HFE sprint.. but this has ended up with a lot of tickets remaining in the “Code Review” state when all that is required is final testing. Also, I don’t know how “Assigned To” works… if multiple people are assigned to a ticket thorough it’s life, is this tracked (and searchable)? If I assign all the tickets to our tester at the end of the workflow, is it going to look like he actually took on all the tickets? Thanks, Mark ________________________________ Click here to unsubscribe<mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l> from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list ________________________________ Click here to unsubscribe<mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l> from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list ________________________________ Click here to unsubscribe<mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l> from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list ________________________________ Click here to unsubscribe<mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l> from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list
