We could use labels for this, I guess, and take those into account when setting up dashboards. But that would mean that if I search for unresolved 1.9 tickets, in the search results I can't easily see which are actually in review, and which are approved-but-awaiting-backport.
Personally I prefer having to go through more JIRA transitions by single-click, as opposed to fewer transitions but I have to think about labels and fixVersions at different steps. -Darius On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Michael Downey <[email protected]>wrote: > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Darius Jazayeri > <[email protected]> wrote: > > The point is to make it easier for someone who has reviewed code and > > approved it to indicate that in the ticket. And creating a linked > > quasi-duplicate issue is more work. > > Agreed. It actually looks like Drupal changed their process at the end > of last year. Looks like they're using tags, e.g., "Needs backport to > 7.x", and they keep the issue in their equivalent status of "the issue > is reviewed but code still needs to be committed before closing the > ticket". We have one of these statuses already (Approved/Committing > Code) which is used after pre-commit reviews. > > I wonder, could we use the combination of fixVersion (or perhaps a > similar JIRA label) and that Committing Code status after code review > to handle backports? I really feel like we should be moving toward > simpler more streamlined JIRA workflows if we can. > > Michael > > _________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list, send an e-mail to > [email protected] with "SIGNOFF openmrs-devel-l" in the body > (not the subject) of your e-mail. > > [mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l] > _________________________________________ To unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list, send an e-mail to [email protected] with "SIGNOFF openmrs-devel-l" in the body (not the subject) of your e-mail. [mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l]
