Sure, good idea. I assume there's a relatively straight forward way to do that with a bulk operation.
On Jan 22, 2014, at 12:09 PM, Paul Benedict <pbened...@apache.org> wrote: > I advise that we add a comment in each closing issue explaining that it was > closed specifically because it's more than 2 years old and to re-open it > only if it is still valid. Otherwise, it will look very rude to close a > ticket without an explanation. > > BTW, what I just recommended was done by JBoss Hibernate and Spring > Framework when they cleared out their old tickets. It was great to know > their reasoning. > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Jason van Zyl <ja...@takari.io> wrote: > >> Ok, I'm going to pull the ripcord tonight (8 hours from now). >> >> On Jan 21, 2014, at 9:19 PM, Jason van Zyl <ja...@takari.io> wrote: >> >>> So after looking at the issues more closely even at the 5 year-old mark >> there are still too many. At the 2 year-old mark it's a bit more >> reasonable. If I close all issues older than 2 years-old which are not >> assigned thats 415 so we would be left with 220 open issues which after a >> week or two I can probably get through, faster with some help. But that's >> probably reasonable as more recent issues are pertinent to 3.x as I myself >> am probably not going to dig back into 2.x issues and fix them. >>> >>> So I propose sending a note to the dev and user list stating that we're >> trying to get the JIRA issue under control. We're closing all unassigned >> issues older than 2 years but people are free to reopen issues for bugs if >> they follow a process of providing a working stand-alone example of the >> problem. >>> >>> This will at least start the cleanup process. >>> >>> How's that sound? >>> >>> On Jan 20, 2014, at 4:53 PM, Jason van Zyl <ja...@takari.io> wrote: >>> >>>> Ok, I'll write something up and send it to the user and dev list. >>>> >>>> On Jan 20, 2014, at 2:17 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 here. >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Anders Hammar <and...@hammar.net> >> wrote: >>>>>> +1 on clean up if we communicate this (and explain why). >>>>>> 0 on move >>>>>> >>>>>> /Anders >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 6:53 PM, Dominik Bartholdi <d...@fortysix.ch> >> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> +1 cleanup is a really good idea! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 20.01.2014, at 18:50, Arnaud Héritier <aherit...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 with a jira cleanup (but documented and announced to users to >> let them >>>>>>>> understand what we do and why) >>>>>>>> +1 to move to ASF >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 6:48 PM, Jason van Zyl <ja...@takari.io> >> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Works for me to just start over on the ASF JIRA. There are a couple >>>>>>> issues >>>>>>>>> I'd move but we can migrate a issues easily. What can't continue >> is the >>>>>>>>> complete, incomprehensible mess that is there now. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Jan 20, 2014, at 12:32 PM, Stephen Connolly < >>>>>>>>> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If we are going wholesale dumping issues (and I am not against >> that), I >>>>>>>>>> have a more radical suggestion... let's just move core to the ASF >>>>>>> JIRA... >>>>>>>>>> with next to no issues needing migration it would be easy ;-) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 20 January 2014 17:23, Jason van Zyl <ja...@takari.io> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Really, it's more about dropping a nuclear bomb on JIRA. While >> trying >>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>> sift through it this weekend it's clear to me it's less than >> ideal in >>>>>>>>> there. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> There are issues that are 12 years old and while there might be >> some >>>>>>>>>>> useful information in there that we hand select, I think >> anything that >>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>> older than 5 years we should just close as incomplete because >> with the >>>>>>>>>>> great deal of change that's happened with 3.x most of it isn't >>>>>>> relevant >>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>> if it is, and someone cares that much then it can be reopened >> with a >>>>>>>>>>> stand-alone working example of the problem. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Now, as to the requirements for a stand-alone working example I >> think >>>>>>> we >>>>>>>>>>> should enforce this because personally I'm not going to check out >>>>>>>>> someone's >>>>>>>>>>> project, figure out how to interpret it in relation to the actual >>>>>>>>> problem >>>>>>>>>>> in Maven and then create a project I can turn into an IT. I'm >> just not >>>>>>>>>>> going to do it generally. There might be exceptions but I don't >> want >>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>> read a textual examples or try to figure out snippets of a >> production >>>>>>>>>>> project that can't be shared. In m2e we require a working example >>>>>>>>> project >>>>>>>>>>> to even look at a problem and if the issue sits there for a year >> with >>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>> working sample project we close it. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Having an issue tracking system with 700 open issues is useless, >> so I >>>>>>>>>>> would like to do a mass purge. It shouldn't really get beyond 50 >> open >>>>>>>>>>> issues or it's just impossible to manage effectively. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Not sure what anyone else thinks but our JIRA situation is just >> not >>>>>>>>>>> effective. I'm thinking anything over 5 years old that isn't >> assigned >>>>>>>>> to a >>>>>>>>>>> core developer we just close as incomplete and then see what >> we're >>>>>>> left >>>>>>>>>>> with. If anyone complains then we point them at doco (I'll write >> it) >>>>>>>>> about >>>>>>>>>>> creating a stand-alone project because otherwise it become >>>>>>> impossible. I >>>>>>>>>>> spent 8 hours over the weekend looking at issues trying to >> interpret >>>>>>>>> what >>>>>>>>>>> someone was trying to say and I don't want to guess. If the user >> cares >>>>>>>>>>> enough they can make an example project. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Jason >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>> Jason van Zyl >>>>>>>>>>> Founder, Apache Maven >>>>>>>>>>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl >>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> happiness is like a butterfly: the more you chase it, the more >> it will >>>>>>>>>>> elude you, but if you turn your attention to other things, it >> will >>>>>>> come >>>>>>>>>>> and sit softly on your shoulder ... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- Thoreau >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jason >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> Jason van Zyl >>>>>>>>> Founder, Apache Maven >>>>>>>>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl >>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> believe nothing, no matter where you read it, >>>>>>>>> or who has said it, >>>>>>>>> not even if i have said it, >>>>>>>>> unless it agrees with your own reason >>>>>>>>> and your own common sense. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- Buddha >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>>> Arnaud Héritier >>>>>>>> http://aheritier.net >>>>>>>> Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com >>>>>>>> Twitter/Skype : aheritier >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Jason >>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------- >>>> Jason van Zyl >>>> Founder, Apache Maven >>>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl >>>> --------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're >> talking about. >>>> >>>> -- John von Neumann >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Jason >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------- >>> Jason van Zyl >>> Founder, Apache Maven >>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl >>> --------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Script timed out:/Users/jvanzyl/signature/signature.sh >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Jason >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------- >> Jason van Zyl >> Founder, Apache Maven >> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> >> We know what we are, but know not what we may be. >> >> -- Shakespeare >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Cheers, > Paul Thanks, Jason ---------------------------------------------------------- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl http://twitter.com/takari_io --------------------------------------------------------- People develop abstractions by generalizing from concrete examples. Every attempt to determine the correct abstraction on paper without actually developing a running system is doomed to failure. No one is that smart. A framework is a resuable design, so you develop it by looking at the things it is supposed to be a design of. The more examples you look at, the more general your framework will be. -- Ralph Johnson & Don Roberts, Patterns for Evolving Frameworks
