2015-05-21 22:39 GMT+02:00 Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com>: > > I don't think sorting helps or that browsing is the issue. What if > you're searching for Open Critical issues concerning Pyspark? If the > list is full of issues that are actually out of scope, later, won't > fix, then that's a problem.
Sure. That is why I was talking about the Inactive resolution specifically. The combination of Priority + other statuses are enough to solve these issues. A minor/trivial issue that is incomplete is probably not going to hurt much to someone looking for critical open issues. > > Game for whose benefit? nobody is being evaluated on this stuff. This > is being proposed for real reasons, not for fun. > Sorry. That was unfortunate on my side. > A bunch of JIRA cruft is a symptom, not a cause. Something is wrong > somewhere if people file JIRAs and they go nowhere. >[...] > I think it's more useful to actually close these to communicate back > clearly what is not going to be accepted. Things can be reopened if > needed. Silently ignoring them forever as an Open JIRA seems less > constructive. > [...] > Yes, best to try to make the process better. That's why I started with > things like a more comprehensive > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SPARK/Contributing+to+Spark > to make better contributions in the first place. By the time dead > JIRAs are closed, something's already gone wrong and time has been > wasted. But we still need that culture of not letting stuff sit > around. > Agreed. That is basically my point. On a side-note, I would like to contribute some time on improving this. When identifying this kind of issue, should I ask in the issue itself to resolve it in a specific way? Best, -- Santiago M. Mola <http://www.stratio.com/> Vía de las dos Castillas, 33, Ática 4, 3ª Planta 28224 Pozuelo de Alarcón, Madrid Tel: +34 91 828 6473 // www.stratio.com // *@stratiobd <https://twitter.com/StratioBD>*
