On Mar 1, 2007, at 7:55 AM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
My understanding is that "Fix Version(s)" captures both the version thatsomething is scheduled to be fixed in (for unresolved issues) and the version that something actually was fixed in (for resolved issues)."Affected Version(s)" identifies the versions that the issue is presentin.
This is how other projects use these two fields, and seems reasonable to me.
So, I spent some time yesterday afternoon doing JIRA triage. My goals were to put together something of a reasonable-if-aggressive schedule for 0.9.7 (presumably the next release), and to adjust priorities according to the JIRA definitions.As ever, those changes aren't set in stone; they're just what I thoughtlooked reasonable.
I agree. It should give us a way to quickly see what remains to be done. You can ask JIRA to give you a list of unresolved issues for a release.
And when we get closer to a release, we can always remove items that seem to be out of scope of the release for whatever reason.
Craig
-Patrick -- Patrick Linskey BEA Systems, Inc.______________________________________________________________________ _ Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return thisby email and then delete it.-----Original Message----- From: Kevin Sutter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 4:55 AM To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [jira] Updated: (OPENJPA-81) Bad error message when trying to query a Collection relation using dot notation Patrick, I'm a little confused with all of these updates you are doing with the JIRA Issues. Most of the updates are related to specifying a Fix Version of 0.9.7. Does this mean you are planning on having all of these Issues resolved for 0.9.7? Or, do you think this field specifies which version needs to be fixed? There is also an Affected Version field, which in my mind, would more closely relate to that idea. Maybe I'm just not familiar enough with the JIRA usage, but if you could explain the reasoning behind these changes, that would be great. Thanks. Kevin On 2/28/07, Patrick Linskey (JIRA) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:[https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-81?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel]Patrick Linskey updated OPENJPA-81: ----------------------------------- Fix Version/s: 0.9.7Bad error message when trying to query a Collectionrelation using dotnotation-------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------Key: OPENJPA-81 URL:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-81Project: OpenJPA Issue Type: Improvement Components: diagnostics, query Environment: openJPA 0.9.7 MySQL 5.0.15 Reporter: Jakob Braeuchi Priority: Minor Fix For: 0.9.7 the query over the 1:n relationship 'katergorien' em.createQuery("select distinct k from KategorieGruppe k " + "where k.kategorien.bezeichnung like ?1 " + "order by k.bezeichnung asc"); uses a wrong alias t2 in the generated SQL: SELECT DISTINCT t0.id, t0.bezeichnung FROMekv2kategoriegruppe t0 INNERJOIN ekv2kategorie t1 ON t0.id = t1.idGruppe WHERE(t2.bezeichnung LIKE ?ESCAPE '\\') ORDER BY t0.bezeichnung ASC [params=(String) F%]Unknown column 't2.bezeichnung' in 'where clause'-- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
