If multiple parties are involved, I feel confident they can work it out and reach a consensus.
Like I said, this has been discussed before. Anyway, more on how to work with JIRA has been written down in our wiki. That you (and/or anyone else) feels that you are spammed by JIRA is unfortunate. But having it email to a separate mailing (as the project decided a while back) should alleviate that sentiment. You (like anyone else) can unsubscribe from that mailing list to avoid getting notifications from activities on issues. I don't particularly believe it to be a good thing for the project to have INFRA asked to turn it of by default (and maybe it isn't even possible to do it for 1 project). But if you feel that strong about it, I suggest you find out. Best regards, Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 3:46 AM, Scott Gray <scott.g...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: > Hi Pierre, > > If I understand correctly, you believe that post-closure assignment should > represent the person who should get the "credit" for the ticket? What if > multiple people contributed? What if there was a lot of back and forth > between the reviewers and the patch contributor? What if the committer had > to rewrite and fix the patch? > > To be honest I don't really care who the post-closure ticket assignee is. > The only solid use I can see is for gathering statistics about either > contributor or committer and either way I don't think it's a useful metric > anyway. One ticket can be 5 minutes work and another can be 5 months so > ticket numbers aren't a useful representation of anything even if we ignore > that multiple people are involved in almost every ticket. > > About this comment you made: > > > It should not be used by committers as a mechanism to claim/imply that > they > > were the sole contributor who scratchted the itch > > I've never heard of anyone stating that the post-closure assignee means > anything other than the last person who was assigned to a ticket before it > was closed. I think you're the only one attempting to add meaning to it. > But hey, who cares, if it means something to you then I don't have an > objection to that. > > Regarding the email spam, jira is a real pain for that. I wish we could > turn off all notifications except for creation and comments, I want to > follow discussions and ignore arbitrary ticket changes. Or at least turn > those off for the jira mailing list, ticket watchers could still get all > notifications directly. > > Regards > Scott > > On 3 May 2017 at 01:13, Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 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 < > scott.g...@hotwaxsystems.com> > > 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" <michael.br...@ecomify.de> > 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 < > > > michael.br...@ecomify.de > > > >> > > > > >> 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" <michael.br...@ecomify.de> > > > >>> 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 < > > > michael.br...@ecomify.de > > > >>>> >: > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> 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) > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
