That's awesome Sean, very clear. One minor thing, noncommiters can't change assigned field as far as I know.
On Oct 9, 2016 3:40 AM, "Sean Owen" <so...@cloudera.com> wrote: I added a variant on this text to https://cwiki.apache.org/ confluence/display/SPARK/Contributing+to+Spark#ContributingtoSpark- ContributingtoJIRAMaintenance On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 10:09 AM Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote: > That flood of emails means several people (Xiao, Holden mostly AFAICT) > have been updating the status of old JIRAs. Thank you, I think that really > does help. > > I have a suggested set of conventions I've been using, just to bring some > order to the resolutions. It helps because JIRA functions as a huge archive > of decisions and the more accurately we can record that the better. What do > people think of this? > > - Resolve as Fixed if there's a change you can point to that resolved the > issue > - If the issue is a proper subset of another issue, mark it a Duplicate of > that issue (rather than the other way around) > - If it's probably resolved, but not obvious what fixed it or when, then > Cannot Reproduce or Not a Problem > - Obsolete issue? Not a Problem > - If it's a coherent issue but does not seem like there is support or > interest in acting on it, then Won't Fix > - If the issue doesn't make sense (non-Spark issue, etc) then Invalid > - I tend to mark Umbrellas as "Done" when done if they're just containers > - Try to set Fix version > - Try to set Assignee to the person who most contributed to the > resolution. Usually the person who opened the PR. Strong preference for > ties going to the more 'junior' contributor > > The only ones I think are sort of important are getting the Duplicate > pointers right, and possibly making sure that Fixed issues have a clear > path to finding what change fixed it and when. The rest doesn't matter much. > >
