Thanks guys.
This thread got more than 3 PMC votes without any objection. I slightly
edited JQL from Abdeali's suggestion (thanks, Abdeali).
JQL:
project = SPARK
AND status in (Open, "In Progress", Reopened)
AND (
affectedVersion = EMPTY OR
NOT (affectedVersion in versionMatch("^3.*")
OR affectedVersion in versionMatch("^2.4.*")
OR affectedVersion in versionMatch("^2.3.*")
)
)
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20SPARK%20%0A%20%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%0A%20%20AND%20(%0A%20%20%20%20affectedVersion%20%3D%20EMPTY%20OR%0A%20%20%20%20NOT%20(affectedVersion%20in%20versionMatch(%22%5E3.*%22)%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20OR%20affectedVersion%20in%20versionMatch(%22%5E2.4.*%22)%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20OR%20affectedVersion%20in%20versionMatch(%22%5E2.3.*%22)%0A%20%20%20%20)%0A%20%20)
It means we will resolve all JIRAs that have EOL releases as affected
versions, including no version specified in affected versions - this will
reduce open JIRAs under 900.
Looks I can use a bulk action feature in JIRA. Tomorrow at the similar
time, I will
- Label those JIRAs as 'bulk-closed'
- Resolve them via `Incomplete` status.
Please double check the list and let me know if you guys have any concern.
2019년 5월 18일 (토) 오후 12:22, Dongjoon Hyun 님이 작성:
> +1, too.
>
> Thank you, Hyukjin!
>
> Bests,
> Dongjoon.
>
>
> On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 9:07 AM Imran Rashid
> wrote:
>
>> +1, thanks for taking this on
>>
>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 7:26 PM Hyukjin Kwon wrote:
>>
>>> oh, wait. 'Incomplete' can still make sense in this way then.
>>> Yes, I am good with 'Incomplete' too.
>>>
>>> 2019년 5월 16일 (목) 오전 11:24, Hyukjin Kwon 님이 작성:
>>>
I actually recently used 'Incomplete' a bit when the JIRA is basically
too poorly formed (like just copying and pasting an error) ...
I was thinking about 'Unresolved' status or `Auto Closed' too. I double
checked they can be reopen as well after resolution.
[image: Screen Shot 2019-05-16 at 10.35.14 AM.png]
[image: Screen Shot 2019-05-16 at 10.35.39 AM.png]
2019년 5월 16일 (목) 오전 11:04, Sean Owen 님이 작성:
> Agree, anything without an Affected Version should be old enough to
> time out.
> I might use "Incomplete" or something as the status, as we haven't
> otherwise used that. Maybe that's simpler than a label. But, anything like
> that sounds good.
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 8:40 PM Hyukjin Kwon
> wrote:
>
>> BTW, affected version became a required field (I don't remember when
>> exactly was .. I believe it's around when we work on Spark 2.3):
>>
>> [image: Screen Shot 2019-05-16 at 10.29.50 AM.png]
>>
>> So, including all EOL versions and affected versions not specified
>> will roughly work.
>> Using "Cannot Reproduce" as its status and 'bulk-closed' label makes
>> the best sense to me.
>>
>> Okie. I want to open this roughly for a week before taking an actual
>> action for this. If there's no more feedback, I will do as I said ^ next
>> week.
>>
>>
>> 2019년 5월 15일 (수) 오후 11:33, Josh Rosen 님이 작성:
>>
>>> +1 in favor of some sort of JIRA cleanup.
>>>
>>> My only request is that we attach some sort of 'bulk-closed' label
>>> to issues that we close via JIRA filter batch operations (and resolve
>>> the
>>> issues as "Timed Out" / "Cannot Reproduce", not "Fixed"). Using a label
>>> makes it easier to audit what was closed, simplifying the process of
>>> identifying and re-opening valid issues caught in our dragnet.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 7:19 AM Sean Owen wrote:
>>>
I gave up looking through JIRAs a long time ago, so, big respect for
continuing to try to triage them. I am afraid we're missing a few
important bug reports in the torrent, but most JIRAs are not
well-formed, just questions, stale, or simply things that won't be
added. I do think it's important to reflect that reality, and so I'm
always in favor of more aggressively closing JIRAs. I think this is
more standard practice, from projects like TensorFlow/Keras, pandas,
etc to just automatically drop Issues that don't see activity for N
days. We won't do that, but, are probably on the other hand far too
lax in closing them.
Remember that JIRAs stay searchable and can be reopened, so it's not
like we lose much information.
I'd close anything that hasn't had activity in 2 years (?), as a
start.
I like the idea of closing things that only affect an EOL release,
but, many items aren't marked, so may need to cast the net wider.
I think only then does it make sense to look at bothering to
reproduce
or evaluate the 1000s that will still remain.
>>>
