Something like:

NEW -> OPEN or TODO or INCOMPLETE
INCOMPLETE -> NEW (when the creator added more details)
OPEN -> TODO or RESOLVED
TODO -> IN PROGRESS (or OPEN or RESOLVED)
IN PROGRESS -> TODO or IN REVIEW or RESOLVED
RESOLVED -> VERIFY or IN PROGRESS
REOPENED -> TODO or RESOLVED
VERIFY -> REOPENED or CLOSED

The idea being that the person opening the ticket gets their "response" to
the resolution when it's in the VERIFY state. The only states that a person
opening a ticket can push it to are INCOMPLETE->NEW , VERIFY->REOPENED or
CLOSED (plus perhaps some ability to flag as user error and it's not a bug
any more).

On 20 January 2017 at 11:03, Stephen Connolly <
[email protected]> wrote:

> On 20 January 2017 at 10:29, Ullrich Hafner <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Am 20.01.2017 um 08:16 schrieb Stephen Connolly <
>> [email protected]>:
>>
>> I also would love if we cleared out the assignee setting entirely.
>>
>>
>> How do we identify who is responsible for the issue (or who is the
>> owner)? If there is no assignee then nobody gets notified about new bug
>> reports or issue updates (if you are not watching an issue).
>>
>
> How do we identify that the issue is available for somebody to pick up and
> work on?
>
> It is ok to use the assignee if you are a plugin maintainer that wants
> complete control and does not seek to have others grow into helping
> maintain your plugin.
>
> I have too many plugins to want to be the sole person responsible for
> fixing issues. (There are some plugins where I need to control what goes
> in, but that doesn't mean I want to develop every fix myself)
>
> I prefer to leave issues unassigned until there is somebody working on
> them.
>
> Plugin maintainers should be scrubbing NEW and INCOMPLETE issues and
> transitioning them into OPEN, back to INCOMPLETE or over to REJECTED.
>
> Then anyone can pick up an unassigned issue in the OPEN state (or better
> yet have a TODO state to indicate that the maintainer is looking for
> implementation)
>
>
>>
>> There are loads of plugins were somebody else has taken up (great) but I
>> still get assigned the issue.
>>
>>
>> Then we should set the default assignee accordingly.
>>
>> I'd rather use assignee to track actually picking up the issue. Status to
>> track triage state.
>>
>> Esp in credentials (which I have been repeatedly and actively scrubbing)
>> use of assignee also helps identify when somebody starts working on the
>> issue.
>>
>>
>> There is a status in progress which we have activated in Jira for such a
>> use case.
>>
>>
>> Ideally the status would have a state to indicate that the JIRA has been
>> accepted as a bug.
>>
>>
>> This makes sense. Currently we have no idea if a developer has accepted a
>> bug report as valid. Since no assignee is attached to most of the new
>> issues the reporter has no clue to see if the bug has been recognized or
>> not.
>>
>> We are using in several other projects an additional initial Jira status
>> ’New’. This status indicates that the bug has been created, but it has not
>> yet been confirmed by the developer team that it is valid. From ‚New‘ there
>> is a transition to ‚Open‘: this transition can be used by our new triage
>> team to indicate that the issue has been reviewed and accepted as a bug.
>> This transition should only be started if the issue is reproducible and if
>> all information are provided. The triage team then could have a filter on
>> all ’New’ issues to see what needs to be reviewed.
>>
>>
>>
>> Another status to indicate that it is ready to be worked on would be
>> awesome
>>
>>
>> 'In Progress' is already available: https://confluence.
>> atlassian.com/adminjiraserver071/working-with-workflows-802592661.html
>>
>>
>> We just need to clarify for everyone what those statuses mean (if they
>> are not self evident)
>> On Fri 20 Jan 2017 at 00:21, Mark Waite <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 1:59 PM Ullrich Hafner <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think this is not the common practice. Wouldn’t it be better to use
>>> the in progress transition for such issues?
>>>
>>> When I create an issue and see that there is no assignee it gives me the
>>> feeling that I should not have spent the time in creating the issue since
>>> nobody actually is interested in fixing it (or responding to it). (As a
>>> user I don’t know that the component owner does use the assignee field
>>> differently then the rest.)
>>>
>>>
>>> In my case, I'm one maintainer with 400+ bugs assigned across the two
>>> plugins I maintain.  If someone assigns all the bugs for the git plugin and
>>> the git client plugin to me, "assignee" will no longer be a useful field to
>>> me and I will ignore it.  I already ignore severity and several other
>>> fields, so that isn't a big problem.  I'd then maintain a record of my
>>> "working set" somewhere else.  It will probably be less visible to others,
>>> since I won't necessarily try to use Jira to maintain it.  I'm fine with
>>> maintaining my "working set" elsewhere, I only use Jira for the working set
>>> because I'm already there reading bug reports.
>>>
>>> I acknowledge that I'm an exception (since the git plugin and the git
>>> client plugin are second only to the Subversion plugin in the total count
>>> of bugs open against them), but since Jesse noted that others use the same
>>> assignment process which I use, I may not be as much of an exception as you
>>> think.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Mark Waite
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 19.01.2017 um 20:50 schrieb Slide <[email protected]>:
>>>
>>> If that is a common practice, then we can skip setting the assignee and
>>> focus on component assignment and reproducibility, or we can have a
>>> "whitelist" of plugins that we set assignee for. The goal isn't to make
>>> things harder for maintainers, we want to help as much as possible by
>>> funneling things to the correct place. If there is something else that
>>> would be more helpful, or an additional scope, please bring it up.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 12:48 PM Mark Waite <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 12:11 PM Jesse Glick <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 12:34 PM, Slide <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> > The outcome of a triage on a specific issue would be that the correct
>>>
>>>
>>> > component(s) and assignee were there.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Do we really need to set an assignee? For example for most
>>>
>>>
>>> `{workflow,pipeline}-*-plugin` components there is intentionally no
>>>
>>>
>>> default assignee. If and when someone intends to work on a fix, they
>>>
>>>
>>> can assign to themselves.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> As further support for what Jesse says, please don't assign me as an
>>> owner for bugs in the git plugin or the git client plugin during the triage
>>> process, unless you're willing to accept that I'll immediately remove that
>>> assignment and return them to "Unassigned".
>>>
>>> I only assign bugs to myself when I want to indicate that I'm working on
>>> them, or intending to work on them "soon".  I use the list of bugs assigned
>>> to me as a reminder of active work, not as another way of expressing the
>>> component name.
>>>
>>> Mark Waite
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Jenkins Developers" group.
>>>
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>
>>>
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms
>>> gid/jenkinsci-dev/CANfRfr0SRoe%2BWirJPscSjeLb_kXszYVFxTqpQDO
>>> CNjio86-TbQ%40mail.gmail.com.
>>>
>>>
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Jenkins Developers" group.
>>>
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>
>>>
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms
>>> gid/jenkinsci-dev/CAO49JtH_W8iHnQUL_xjV2fA-pCibkzfOkkU2P%2Bz
>>> UNrdqV0H43w%40mail.gmail.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAO49JtH_W8iHnQUL_xjV2fA-pCibkzfOkkU2P%2BzUNrdqV0H43w%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>>>
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Jenkins Developers" group.
>>>
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>
>>>
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms
>>> gid/jenkinsci-dev/CAPiUgVfcK4R8i4W%3DGs8mW94Agzn5jdyudQk_
>>> zpt_Yg3XC9%2BbuA%40mail.gmail.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAPiUgVfcK4R8i4W%3DGs8mW94Agzn5jdyudQk_zpt_Yg3XC9%2BbuA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>>>
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Jenkins Developers" group.
>>>
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>
>>>
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms
>>> gid/jenkinsci-dev/4C16E3F0-8F9D-43F2-854B-C2E0FD29D6D2%40gmail.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/4C16E3F0-8F9D-43F2-854B-C2E0FD29D6D2%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>>>
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Jenkins Developers" group.
>>>
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>
>>>
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms
>>> gid/jenkinsci-dev/CAO49JtE685zds-5QdsWhWR59%3D_MmL%2B-
>>> AZseAH%2B-dpkcaNqCmng%40mail.gmail.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAO49JtE685zds-5QdsWhWR59%3D_MmL%2B-AZseAH%2B-dpkcaNqCmng%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>>>
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>> Sent from my phone
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Jenkins Developers" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected].
>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms
>> gid/jenkinsci-dev/CA%2BnPnMwGf466pLG_mnRQ8e0jYGB%2B%3DX-
>> pOKpwfo32dDixnUbhSg%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CA%2BnPnMwGf466pLG_mnRQ8e0jYGB%2B%3DX-pOKpwfo32dDixnUbhSg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Jenkins Developers" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected].
>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms
>> gid/jenkinsci-dev/78782FEB-70BD-4396-AE7D-7951877B4765%40gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/78782FEB-70BD-4396-AE7D-7951877B4765%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Jenkins Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CA%2BnPnMzYiz%3DLrD-V%2BTs3MbpsXSqUHhTQet9YvuLvo7yJzjJjxQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to