On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 5:25 AM, Grant Ingersoll <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>  > - Anything that isn't fixed by December is WontFix and we release 0.6.
> >
> > I realize it's drastic, but it's a coherent position.
>
> Not at all drastic and perfectly sane.


So regarding JIRA management.  I see that Benson and Sean come from
a viewpoint that long-lived open JIRA tickets are a bad sign, while people
like Grant, myself, and to some degree Ted, are used to seeing open tickets
in an unresolved state that are used as placeholders which tell the outside
observer what has been suggested in the past and what discussions have
gone on around it, and maybe even has a (currently outdated) patch of
a proposed solution.

I'm really of the mind that WontFix is meant for "this idea does not fit at
all /
won't work / and we never intend to do this".  Good ideas which we don't
have the bandwidth for are instead unversioned and left open.  I think
WontFix on an "old ticket" sends a message to the person who opened it
that we're not interested in their contribution, or if it's a bugfix, that
we're
arrogant and don't think they are correct in stating it's an important bug.

I'd much rather we find an acceptable unresolved state than always push
for "0 open JIRA tickets".  The Hadoop community also has very long lived
open tickets with slow progress, it's not just Lucene.  I think this is
healthy
and a nice way to keep track of what people have thought about in the past.

  -jake

Reply via email to