I like the idea of having a 2.1 version in Jira for items I intend to address after the 2.0 release. Items without version would (to me) mean either long-term items or items that I don't have the expertise for (or interest in, grin).
One thing I find different in an open source project from working on a company project is assigning and scheduling issues. In an OS project you can pretty much only assign to yourself and schedule the items that you are planning to address yourself. (But as it's voluntary work, and other things come up, I find that even planning my own time to spend on log4j is not reliable...) So the Jira is all best effort IMHO. What seems to work ok for me is just picking items I'm interested in from the list of open Jiras, and assign them to myself (basically letting the rest of the team know that I'm currently working on this to avoid double work that would waste other people's time). Then provide the fix (with unit tests to prove the fix works) within some reasonable time. Remko Sent from my iPhone > On 2014/02/28, at 8:34, Bruce Brouwer <bruce.brou...@gmail.com> wrote: > > One of the things that I find difficult right now is knowing what needs the > most attention for the purpose of releasing 2.0. There are actually very few > issues in JIRA that are assigned to 2.0 or 2.0-rc2. There are a daunting > number of issues that are not assigned a fix version. > > From what I can see, much of the discussion on this mailing list is for > issues that are not assigned a fix version. I'm guessing that many of the > messages I am seeing could be delayed until after 2.0. How much of our > attention is being spent on addressing issues that aren't contributing to > releasing 2.0? > > I am willing to help. One of my roles is a JIRA admin in my day job. If I > were given edit permission, I could take a stab at assigning unscheduled > issues to a proper release. If you gave me the appropriate project admin > permission, I could even create new versions (e.g. 2.1, ...). I could always > comment my reasoning if I pushed something off to 2.1. > > What is the distinction between 2.0 and 2.0-rc2? Should 2.0 be the bucket for > everything that needs to be fixed before GA and we pull those issues into > -rcX as we have time? > > I just would like the project to keep focused on release 2.0 and not being > distracted by stuff that should really wait for 2.1. > > Is there any interest in having me (or someone else) do this? > > -- > > Bruce Brouwer --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
