This has been discussed before. JIRA is a tool for contributors. Intended to provide insight on open issues and to simply identify who was the lead contributor that brought a closed issue to a succesful resolution.
It should not be used by committers as a mechanism to claim/imply that they were the sole contributor who scratchted the itch (in other words: improved the code base of the project), when another contributor has done all the legwork (register the issue, investigate it, provide the patch - order of importance, etc.) and the committer did little more than the commit (which is part of his obligation to help others and which comes with the privilege). Best regards, Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Scott Gray <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm of two minds: > 1. Who cares, it's no big deal. If a contributor wants to micro manage > their contributions, so what? > 2. It creates unnecessary noise in an already busy mailing list and also > prevents us from knowing which committers are most responsive to > contributions. > > I agree with Pierre that it's not difficult to know who committed a > particular issue when that issue is in focus. > > This is one of those topics where we don't currently have a policy so we > either need to make one or decide we don't care enough to bother. > > Regards > Scott > > On 2/05/2017 7:44 PM, "Michael Brohl" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Pierre, > > > > you are still reassigning lots of old Jiras to yourself without answering > > our questions why you are doing so. > > > > Please stop it and give us your reasons why you are doing so. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Michael > > > > > > Am 02.05.17 um 09:36 schrieb Pierre Smits: > > > >> I apologise for any inconvenience caused. > >> > >> Using JIRA as tool to 'blame' a committer when something goes sour is > not > >> the best what comes to my mind. There are other services of the ASF that > >> help in that respect, such as ViewVC and FishEye. Those tools provide > way > >> better means to assess who committed what and when (even for statistical > >> purposes). > >> > >> Best regards, > >> > >> Pierre Smits > >> > >> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> > >> OFBiz based solutions & services > >> > >> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace > >> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ > >> > >> On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 10:18 AM, Michael Brohl < > [email protected] > >> > > >> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Scott, > >>> > >>> thanks for trying to clarify and giving your opinion on this. > >>> > >>> See my remarks inline. > >>> > >>> > >>> Am 30.04.17 um 04:30 schrieb Scott Gray: > >>> > >>> I would prefer they were left assigned to the committer since the onus > >>>> tends to fall on them if there are any post closure issues. > >>>> > >>>> Exactly what I would prefer also. In most cases the commit and > >>> backporting > >>> is the last action taken and should be recorded as such. > >>> > >>> My guess if that Pierre wants to track what tickets he contributed to > >>> > >>>> beyond being the reporter. Could you confirm Pierre? > >>>> > >>>> Beyond what I've mentioned is there any other reason you have an issue > >>>> with > >>>> it Michael? > >>>> > >>>> I think it is against the natural workflow as mentioned above. I > cannot > >>> remember that anyone else assigns tickets back to himself after they > are > >>> finished. > >>> > >>> It falsifies the statistics to reassign issues, especially if they are > >>> old. > >>> > >>> When it comes to contributions, the committer contribution would be > >>> hidden. > >>> > >>> It produces unnecessary traffic in Jira and the notification mailing > >>> lists > >>> and adds nothing valuable. > >>> > >>> Just trying to figure out everyone's reasoning so we can work towards a > >>>> solution. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks Scott, that's what I was trying to achieve also in my last two > >>> questions to Pierre. > >>> > >>> Regards > >>>> Scott > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> > >>> Michael > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On 29/04/2017 11:45 PM, "Michael Brohl" <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi Pierre, > >>>> > >>>> you are again reassigning lots of old and already closed Jiras to > >>>> yourself. > >>>> Can you please stop this and give us an explanation why you are doing > >>>> so? > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Michael > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Am 23.04.2017 um 15:56 schrieb Michael Brohl < > [email protected] > >>>> >: > >>>> > >>>>> Hi Pierre, > >>>>> > >>>>> what's the reason to reassign old and already closed issues to > yourself > >>>>> again? > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards, > >>>>> > >>>>> Michael > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Am 23.04.17 um 13:06 schrieb Pierre Smits (JIRA): > >>>>> > >>>>>> [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8232?page= > >>>>>> > >>>>>> com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] > >>>>> Pierre Smits reassigned OFBIZ-8232: > >>>>> > >>>>>> ----------------------------------- > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Assignee: Pierre Smits (was: Jacopo Cappellato) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Improve Dutch labels for commonext component > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> -------------------------------------------- > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Key: OFBIZ-8232 > >>>>>>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira > >>>>>>> /browse/OFBIZ-8232 > >>>>>>> Project: OFBiz > >>>>>>> Issue Type: Improvement > >>>>>>> Components: commonext > >>>>>>> Affects Versions: Trunk > >>>>>>> Reporter: Pierre Smits > >>>>>>> Assignee: Pierre Smits > >>>>>>> Priority: Minor > >>>>>>> Labels: labels, refactoring > >>>>>>> Fix For: 16.11.01 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Attachments: OFBIZ-8232-CommonExtUiLabels.xml.patch > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>> This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA > >>>>>> (v6.3.15#6346) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > > > > >
