> Subject: Re: The JIRA chocolate box
> From: [email protected]
> Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 19:54:30 -0700
> To: [email protected]
>
> My guess is a reference to Forrest Gump - you never know what you are going
> to get.
>
> Ralph
MG>and thats all i have to say about that!...MG
MG>Thanks Ralph
>
> On Jun 18, 2011, at 7:51 PM, Martin Gainty wrote:
>
> >
> > agreed
> > although scanning the Surefire JIRA i did notice some of jasons original
> > jiras were'nt addressed for upwards of 3-4 years (by Brett Porter)
> >
> > I havent heard of JIRA chocolate box..maybe an implementation of a Finite
> > State Machine or perhaps this is a non sequitir?
> > Bedankt,
> > Martin
> > ______________________________________________
> >
> >> Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 18:30:04 -0400
> >> Subject: The JIRA chocolate box
> >> From: [email protected]
> >> To: [email protected]
> >>
> >> I just looked at the 'blocker' issues. We have a variety of very old
> >> JIRAs here. None of the ones I looked at have a self-contained test
> >> case that would can be downloaded, run, and converted to an
> >> integration test, etc.
> >>
> >> What's the policy? My temptation would be to comment on them asking if
> >> the OP is still interested (in some cases, 5 years later), and, if so,
> >> can they come up with a repeatable test case, and if not close as not
> >> a real bug.
> >>
> >> I don't mind in some cases doing work to build a test case, but to go
> >> to all this trouble for a bug that was opened about maven 2.0.x, where
> >> it may not be that easy to reconstruct the critical components of the
> >> problem, seems a dubious use of time.
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> 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]
>
