+1

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Thanh Ha <[email protected]>
wrote:

> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 5:24 AM, Robert Varga <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 17/05/17 21:11, Andrew Grimberg wrote:
>> > We've got changes still open going all the way back to 2013! I would
>> > like to put a proposal out that we auto-abandon changes that are >6
>> > months in age and in all honesty I would like to do it for any change
>> > that is >6 weeks old but I figured that 6 months was a good starting
>> point.
>>
>> I am not sure I like auto-abandon, two main reasons being:
>>
>> 1) I do have a bunch of patches that I mean to return to, but are low
>> priority right now. I certainly would not like them disappearing from my
>> dashboard, although that would be okay if there was a 'My Abandoned
>> Changes' view.
>>
>> 2) We were bitten by 'abandon' before, where a patch was abandoned while
>> it was waiting for dust to settle on after a release. The end result was
>> a bug report for something that should have been fixed for 6+ months and
>> a wasted day digging through history to understand where the fix went
>> missing. Bug tracking should help here, but BZ is simply awful for
>> tracking things to be delivered to multiple branches.
>>
>> At any rate, 6 weeks is definitely too aggresive.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Robert
>>
>
> I agree with Robert. I too use DRAFTs and old patches that I eventually
> get back to  as they are low priority at the moment. Auto abandon will make
> us forget about these low priority work in progress.
>
> Thanh
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Reply via email to