Agree, anything without an Affected Version should be old enough to time out. I might use "Incomplete" or something as the status, as we haven't otherwise used that. Maybe that's simpler than a label. But, anything like that sounds good.
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 8:40 PM Hyukjin Kwon <gurwls...@gmail.com> wrote: > BTW, affected version became a required field (I don't remember when > exactly was .. I believe it's around when we work on Spark 2.3): > > [image: Screen Shot 2019-05-16 at 10.29.50 AM.png] > > So, including all EOL versions and affected versions not specified will > roughly work. > Using "Cannot Reproduce" as its status and 'bulk-closed' label makes the > best sense to me. > > Okie. I want to open this roughly for a week before taking an actual > action for this. If there's no more feedback, I will do as I said ^ next > week. > > > 2019년 5월 15일 (수) 오후 11:33, Josh Rosen <rosenvi...@gmail.com>님이 작성: > >> +1 in favor of some sort of JIRA cleanup. >> >> My only request is that we attach some sort of 'bulk-closed' label to >> issues that we close via JIRA filter batch operations (and resolve the >> issues as "Timed Out" / "Cannot Reproduce", not "Fixed"). Using a label >> makes it easier to audit what was closed, simplifying the process of >> identifying and re-opening valid issues caught in our dragnet. >> >> >> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 7:19 AM Sean Owen <sro...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I gave up looking through JIRAs a long time ago, so, big respect for >>> continuing to try to triage them. I am afraid we're missing a few >>> important bug reports in the torrent, but most JIRAs are not >>> well-formed, just questions, stale, or simply things that won't be >>> added. I do think it's important to reflect that reality, and so I'm >>> always in favor of more aggressively closing JIRAs. I think this is >>> more standard practice, from projects like TensorFlow/Keras, pandas, >>> etc to just automatically drop Issues that don't see activity for N >>> days. We won't do that, but, are probably on the other hand far too >>> lax in closing them. >>> >>> Remember that JIRAs stay searchable and can be reopened, so it's not >>> like we lose much information. >>> >>> I'd close anything that hasn't had activity in 2 years (?), as a start. >>> I like the idea of closing things that only affect an EOL release, >>> but, many items aren't marked, so may need to cast the net wider. >>> >>> I think only then does it make sense to look at bothering to reproduce >>> or evaluate the 1000s that will still remain. >>> >>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 4:25 AM Hyukjin Kwon <gurwls...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hi all, >>> > >>> > I would like to propose to resolve all JIRAs that affects EOL releases >>> - 2.2 and below. and affected version >>> > not specified. I was rather against this way and considered this as >>> last resort in roughly 3 years ago >>> > when we discussed. Now I think we should go ahead with this. See below. >>> > >>> > I have been talking care of this for so long time almost every day >>> those 3 years. The number of JIRAs >>> > keeps increasing and it does never go down. Now the number is going >>> over 2500 JIRAs. >>> > Did you guys know? in JIRA, we can only go through page by page up to >>> 1000 items. So, currently we're even >>> > having difficulties to go through every JIRA. We should manually >>> filter out and check each. >>> > The number is going over the manageable size. >>> > >>> > I am not suggesting this without anything actually trying. This is >>> what we have tried within my visibility: >>> > >>> > 1. In roughly 3 years ago, Sean tried to gather committers and even >>> non-committers people to sort >>> > out this number. At that time, we were only able to keep this >>> number as is. After we lost this momentum, >>> > it kept increasing back. >>> > 2. At least I scanned _all_ the previous JIRAs at least more than >>> two times and resolved them. Roughly >>> > once a year. The rest of them are mostly obsolete but not enough >>> information to investigate further. >>> > 3. I strictly stick to "Contributing to JIRA Maintenance" >>> https://spark.apache.org/contributing.html and >>> > resolve JIRAs. >>> > 4. Promoting other people to comment on JIRA or actively resolve >>> them. >>> > >>> > One of the facts I realised is the increasing number of committers >>> doesn't virtually help this much (although >>> > it might be helpful if somebody active in JIRA becomes a committer.) >>> > >>> > One of the important thing I should note is that, it's now almost >>> pretty difficult to reproduce and test the >>> > issues found in EOL releases. We should git clone, checkout, build and >>> test. And then, see if that issue >>> > still exists in upstream, and fix. This is non-trivial overhead. >>> > >>> > Therefore, I would like to propose resolving _all_ the JIRAs that >>> targets EOL releases - 2.2 and below. >>> > Please let me know if anyone has some concerns or objections. >>> > >>> > Thanks. >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org >>> >>>
