I'm done with this topic but to be clear, I want to read conversations in
jira.  Sifting through pointless emails to get to the discussions is a pain
though, as a quick example 7 out of the last 20 jira emails contain nothing
useful.  Unsubscribing is also not a useful solution for reading those
conversations but thanks for the suggestion I guess.

Regards
Scott

On 3 May 2017 at 18:46, Pierre Smits <[email protected]> wrote:

> 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 <[email protected]>
> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <
> > [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)
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to