Thanks for your reply, Kathey! Please see comments inlined.
Kathey Marsden <[email protected]> writes: > I think we should resolve these Cannot Reproduce if we have received > no new information for six months. +1 Would a flag indicating that a repro is available make it easier to identify such issues? Sounds like sifting through 1100+ issues is a bit tiresome ;-) > > I think we should make more aggressive use of 'Later' and 'Won't > Fix' for issues which we think are just not going to get fixed any > time soon. Issues can always be reopened if someone wants to pick > them up. Since this analysis is highly subjective, I think the best > way to do this is to put a comment in the issue with your intent and > then resolve it a few weeks later if nobody balks. I am not sure how we would use the "Later" flag. What would the criteria be? I have a clearer sense of what "Won't fix" means; the procedure you suggest is fine with me. This being open source, we as a community aren't really making any guarantees in the first place... I guess what I am saying i that all issues not assigned are per definition "Later". > As Knut suggested, I think a bulk update and removal of the categories > and tracking issues like DERBY-310 is appropriate. Perhaps Rick or > someone with existing powers can give you authority to do this if you > don't have it already. +1 No, I don't have such powers (yet). > I think ideally all content should move to the Wiki for easy update > and just have a link or two from the website. +1 > I made the Wiki page, http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/DerbyJiraReports > to help individuals maintain Jira. Thanks for that link; I have seen it before, but I missed it this time. Seems a good start! > individuals or global reports for those who might feel a bit more > ambitious. Theoretically if everyone looked at the individual reports > periodically we would be able to keep Jira tidy. I had hoped that > HighValueFix would be a way for us to converge on a good list of bugs > to fix with this distributed analysis. I had thought it would be > about 10% of our bug backlog but it has grown to a larger list. I had > hoped to see other developers marking issues HighValue or objecting to > issues that I had marked that way, but so far it is sort of a list of > Kathey's favorites. I am not sure if anyone besides me uses it. And even with only you (in the main) using it it has got too long.. ;) Maybe that indicates that we have some serious backlog here. > > It might be interesting to have a quarterly IRC review of the > HighValueFix list. Before the meeting , everyone reviews issues and > puts them on the HighValueFix list if they think they belong there > based on the criteria at > http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/HighValueFixCandidates (or modified > criteria) and then in the meeting we can go through the list and take > issues off if everyone agrees they don't belong there. We could > strictly adhere to the 10% mark in the meeting so the list doesn't get > too big. Perhaps in the meeting we could also get volunteers to pick > up important issues. I think this is a great idea. It would give us an opportunity to coordinate! +1 > I am seeing only 355 (still too many) Sorry, I had a bit too many components in my query. 355 is right. If I add Performance and Regression Test Failure to your set of categories, I get 404. Dag
