On 2019/03/04 17:47:33, Dmitriy Pavlov <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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.
Hi Dimitry
Yes - I think someone else has shown that we need to request the change of flow
through Infra, so once we agree then we can create the request.
>
> 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.
There is a default anonymous user with view access only. I think this is a
safeguard against spam. As far as I know, I didn't think setting the user
permissions were a problem and I've generally added people once they have
requested access.( BTW I've added you to the wiki with edit access.)
Thanks
Sharan
>
> (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
> >
>
