On 9/13/05, Will Glass-Husain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I like Mike's idea "mark bugs closed when they're fixed in a public > release". Seems less arbitary then close after X public releases. A > release should mean that all enhancements are correct and all bugs are > really fixed. Otherwise - why release? > > The process becomes > -> "Reporter" creates issue with bug report > -> "Contributor" marks ASSIGNED, uploads patch > -> "Committer" commits patch to source code and marks RESOLVED > -> As part of the release process, all bugs marked with the release version > number must move to CLOSED. > > The last bullet implies that the committer(s) do a review of all bugs and > make sure they are really resolved. To be safe, the bugs should be closed > when the release goes "gold". In other words, first release "1.5rc1", then > if necessary release "1.5rc2". If that release holds water, mark all bugs > as closed and go to "1.5". > > Comments?
works for me. i suppose it's not that big a deal to give reporters that much time to check up on their bugs once resolved. > Best, > WILL > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mike Kienenberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Velocity Developers List" <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 8:30 AM > Subject: Re: Jira maintenance > > > In Cayenne, we mark bugs closed when they're fixed in a public release. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
