Hi Ulli, Thanks for the feedback, please find my responses below
Am 14.08.2017 um 17:10 schrieb Oleg Nenashev <[email protected]>: > > IIUC this proposal would allow us to have an intermediate state between In >> Review and Resolved/Fixed. > > > That makes our workflow complex to understand for others. Who is > responsible to move the issues from the new state to resolved? If you > consider to add another state please make it optional and do not change the > default (and simple) workflow for plugin authors. > I do not propose to enforce this state everywhere. My proposal is to add such state and transitions required like we previously did for "In Review". If plugin authors do not want to use the new state in their plugins, they can continue using the current transition graphs (e.g. "New" => "In Progress" => "Resolved") without any issues. The only thing they will see is an additional option in the dropdowns when they select the state to set. Exactly > > >> +1, I have seen people get confused when an issue is moved to >> Resolved/Fixed after a PR is merged yet the fix is not available on >> the update center. > > > Good point. Once we have the fix, we will be able to update Jenkins Issue > autoupdater to move the > issues to the "Stage Release" state instead of "Resolved". > > > Please do not change the current behavior. Most plugin authors do not need > such an overly complex workflow. We just fix some issues, make a release > and move forward to the next ones. > We could change the flow only for particular components (Jenkins core, modules, remoting) and keep the original one for plugins. Though I would rather prefer to have the proposed change for my plugins as well, we could meet on the middle in this case. Would it work for you? > Would like to know: > > - New state name? "Stage Release“ > > I’m not a native speaker but Stage Release seems to be grammatically > different from the other ones: Closed, Resolved, In Progress I am open to other name proposals. > > > Please don’t change the default names in Jira, there are so many people > that use Jira in other projects. +1, there is not so much benefit in renaming the existing names. Maybe we could just name the new state as "Needs Release" or "To Be Released" or whatever. > (BTW I am not sure what the Closed resolution is for.) > > > Nobody knows :( > Maybe we want to just remove it and merge with Resolved > > > > Actually Closed is used to mark that an issue actually has been verified > to be fixed in a released version. Normally this is done by the reporter > (or in other projects by QA). > Well, in Jenkins JIRA it does not happen from what I see. I think we could keep "Resolved" and "Closed" as is for now. BR, Oleg 2017-08-15 0:33 GMT+02:00 Daniel Beck <[email protected]>: > > > On 14. Aug 2017, at 23:54, Ullrich Hafner <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Please don’t change the default names in Jira, there are so many people > that use Jira in other projects. > > I'm open to alternatives. Try to make them unambiguous though. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ > topic/jenkinsci-dev/wzc4VLplHvs/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ > msgid/jenkinsci-dev/4F160C4F-DD13-4B73-948F-668C77DEB0DA%40beckweb.net. > 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/CAPfivLDj%2BBCQSts1hkdw5hzmmGG9%3Db%2Baaa4q2Mm5%3D0vf4mAbfg%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
