Hi = JIRA workflow I've checked JIRA admin interface and there is no option to edit Issue Workflow. So I guess only Infra can edit Workflows.
AFAIK Apache JIRA has a number of pre-defined workflows, and probably we need somehow to point to some option. = Wiki pages As for the wiki, Confluence has a number of permissions to be defined for each user, and I'm not sure Apache wiki has convenient groups in it. (P)PMCs, please grant me admin access to the wiki and I could setup/edit user permissions. username=dpavlov Sincerely, Dmitriy Pavlov пн, 4 мар. 2019 г. в 20:27, Mirko Kämpf <[email protected]>: > Hi Sönke, > > I registered and logged in to the Wiki (for adding the report template) > but I can't find the page editor. > Are there any permission issues which give me read-only access? > > Best regards, > Mirko > > > > Am Mo., 4. März 2019 um 12:04 Uhr schrieb Sönke Liebau > <[email protected]>: > > > Thanks Mirko! > > > > For me there are three main questions that we should consider around > > the workflow. If I am missing something, please shout out, I am by no > > means an expert on this! > > > > 1. Do we want an "accepted" state that means someone looked at this > > ticket and it has merit and is not just a user question that is better > > placed on the mailing list/far too broad/... ? > > 2. Do we want a "reviewable" state? > > 3. Do we want an explicit "closed" state? The current workflow has > > "resolved" which means something has been committed to address this > > issue and now the original reporter should check whether the issue > > itself has been fixed and transition the issue to either "closed" or > > "reopened". > > > > I do like the idea of 1, as it gives us a better option of keeping > > track of whether or not a ticket has been triaged already. If you have > > some time on your hands and want to fix an issue picking from > > "accepted" is easier than potentially sifting through 10 "open" ones > > until you find an actionable one. > > > > I think 2 is really useful and we should definitely have that. > > > > 3 I'm on the fence about, personally I think if the commit doesn't > > meet what the ticket was about then this should have been addressed > > during review. I think this workflow is more suited for a > > customer-service provider situation where the customer needs to sign > > off on a solution. > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > Best regards, > > Sönke > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 11:38 AM Mirko Kämpf <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > Hello Sönke, > > > > > > I like the proposal to use a workflow with an explicit state for > > > "reviewable" issues. > > > Unfortunately, I do not know how to set it up or how to request this > > change. > > > > > > +1 ---> Mesos Workflow: https://imgur.com/a/6zWFK4e > > > > > > > > > > > > Am Mo., 4. März 2019 um 11:33 Uhr schrieb Sönke Liebau > > > <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > Bumping to see if really no one has an opinion on this :) > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 3:53 PM Sönke Liebau < > > [email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Ah, apologies, wasn't aware of that. > > > > > > > > > > Default Workflow: https://imgur.com/a/EfKcOfL > > > > > Mesos Workflow: https://imgur.com/a/6zWFK4e > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > Sönke > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 3:48 PM Lars Francke < > [email protected] > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > (Mailing list swallows attachments Sönke, can you host them > > > > externally?) > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 3:33 PM Sönke Liebau > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Our Jira currently is still operating with the default workflow > > (see > > > > > > > 1_default_workflow.png) which is fairly basic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Personally I'd like something along the lines of "reviewable" > or > > > > > > > "patch available" to symbolize that this is waiting for someone > > to > > > > > > > take a look at. > > > > > > > Also, it might be an option to triage issues up front, i.e. > have > > > > > > > someone look at it and evaluate whether this actually is an > > issue or > > > > > > > not appropriate. Granted, this can also be covered by closing > > issues > > > > > > > after looking at them, but that misses the explicit information > > > > > > > whether someone already looked at it, if it is still open. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Looking through workflows that other projects adopted, the > Mesos > > > > > > > workflow closely resembles what I wrote ab > <https://maps.google.com/?q=%3E+workflow+closely+resembles+what+I+wrote+ab&entry=gmail&source=g>ove > (see > > > > > > > 2_mesos_workflow.png) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Looking through some other projects the "patch available-reop > <https://maps.google.com/?q=some+other+projects+the+%22patch+available-reop&entry=gmail&source=g> > en > > > > > > > possible" workflow seems to be fairly common. A lot of > > variations > > > > > > > just differ by the way they name the "patch available" state. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any thoughts on the route we want to take? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > Sönke > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Sönke Liebau > > > > > Partner > > > > > Tel. +49 179 7940878 <+49%20179%207940878> > > > > > OpenCore GmbH & Co. KG - Thomas-Mann-Straße 8 - 22880 Wedel - > Germany > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Sönke Liebau > > > > Partner > > > > Tel. +49 179 7940878 <+49%20179%207940878> > > > > OpenCore GmbH & Co. KG - Thomas-Mann-Straße 8 - 22880 Wedel - Germany > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Dr. rer. nat. Mirko Kämpf > > > Müchelner Str. 23 > > > 06259 Frankleben > > > > > > > > -- > > Sönke Liebau > > Partner > > Tel. +49 179 7940878 <+49%20179%207940878> > > OpenCore GmbH & Co. KG - Thomas-Mann-Straße 8 - 22880 Wedel - Germany > > > > > -- > > Dr. rer. nat. Mirko Kämpf > Müchelner Str. 23 > 06259 Frankleben >
