On 10/05/2011 19:13, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
No problem. The biggest problem now is closing issues. Do we want to have
someone other than the person who worked the issue ( and marked it resolved)
close it?
Personally I prefer issues to be verified by someone other than the
person who did the work. I think our community here is large enough to
allow this to happen.
However, doing so does add overhead on the community.
The way we do it on some projects is that we make it part of the testing
cycle for a release. That is, once a release candidate has been packaged
we ask community members (need not be committers) to test new features
and bug fixes that have been resolved but not closed.
This does mean that issues remain in the resolved state for some time,
but it also means we have a fairly solid testing plan for release
candidates. Assuming that the new features/bug fixes have been tested
during the development cycle there should be no reason for this to slow
down a release (significantly).
What do others think?
Ross
Sent from my mobile device
-----Original Message-----
From: Ross Gardler [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 11:34 AM Eastern Standard Time
To: [email protected]
Subject: Issue Triage (Thanks Matt)
Matt,
Thanks for looking after the issue tracker for us. It's an important job
that so often gets neglected.
We should all chip in to this kind of task whenever we have a few
moments spare for Rave.
JIRA allows quite complex filters to be set up, I'm happy to set any up
that the team think might be useful. For example:
"Issues with no activity for> 30 days"
Ross
