Hubert Rabago wrote:
On 12/1/05, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If we add the "TBD" milestone, I encourage everyone to only add tickets to it if
it is a clear, reachable goal that we want to achieve. While I'm afraid it will
attract stagnant tickets no one cares about, I understand some folks find it
useful, and I'm usually wrong anyways :)
Maybe we can agree that if a ticket has had no progress for 12 or 18
or 24 mos, it should be reviewed and possibly marked WONTFIX /
INVALID.
Sure. What about as a step 2.5 making use of the
http://struts.apache.org/issue-tracking.html page to record issue tracking
policies and conventions?
Next, I see the following steps:
Step 2:
- Move closed tickets included in soon-to-be-released projects to their
milestone.
- Wade through TBD tickets and assign to milestones
While I like Martin's idea of only putting tickets to milestones when someone
commits to resolving them <snip/>
I thought this was your idea? (#3 on your initial proposal)
http://www.nabble.com/-PROPOSAL-Target-tickets-to-milestones-and-use-as-roadmap-p1711361.html
Actually, it was originally Martin's and I agreed, but after more thought,
decided a looser interpretation would be better.
Perhaps we could start
using the "Assigned" field more often to mark which ones have been taken up and
which are just hanging.
...or the combination of "Assigned" and a milestone means that
committer plans to resolve the ticket for the specified milestone.
Sure, more good stuff for that issue tracking page :)
Don
Hubert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
