Hi Dan, I don't have any specific problem with what you describe, as long as the accepted side-effect is that particular umbrella tickets are closed before a release, then identical, new ones, are created for the next release?
For example, I have a trivial "minor pom.xml edits" ticket - for making changes that *don't* affect the build output (like turning off snapshots on repositories that don't require it). Before a release, this ticket is closed, but a copy is created after release? Regards, Kevin On 10 Sep 2011 at 16:58, Dan Haywood wrote: > Hi Kevin, > > My view would be that umbrella tickets should be closed either > a) if the committer making the series of changes (like all your recent > updates to the objectstore) judges that they are now done, or > b) if a release is going to be made, so that the release notes can correctly > reflect current state. > > If you think that (a) is true but then later (and before a release has gone > out) you decide you want to reopen the ticket, that's seems ok by me also. > But I don't think that tickets should be re-opened after a release has gone > out, as that would invalidate that release's release notes. > > Other opinions? > > Dan > > > On 10 September 2011 16:40, Kevin Meyer wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Should umbrella tickets be open or closed? > > > > I mean, they don't indicate an actual problem, they're more a helper so > > that minor activity can be tracked.. can they be marked as closed? or > > at least "not a problem"?
