: I suggest we marge "Next" into "3.2" ...
Ok, i fixed the few issues that were marked "fixed" in Next (they were all
really for 3.1), and merged "Next" into 3.2.
David: I *think* that wraps up all of the concerns you pointed out about
our Jira version tracking, but please holler if I missed
+1 - next should be nuked, the issues should simply be plopped into the next
likely release and dealt with (done, moved, pushed) before release.
On May 5, 2011, at 3:24 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
>
> : > We should definitely kill of "Next" ... i would suggest just removing it,
> : > and not b
Marge away ;-)
On May 5, 2011, at 3:24 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
> I suggest we marge "Next" into "3.2" ...
>
> http://confluence.atlassian.com/display/JIRA/Managing+Versions#ManagingVersions-Mergingmultipleversions
>
>
> ...objections?
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Chris Hostetter
wrote:
> I suggest we marge "Next" into "3.2" ...
+1
Mike
http://blog.mikemccandless.com
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-m
: > We should definitely kill of "Next" ... i would suggest just removing it,
: > and not bulk applying a new version (there is no requirement that issues
: > have a version)
...
: Based on that, I think it would be irresponsible to just delete "Next"
: because any issues assigned to t
On May 2, 2011, at 7:54 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
> We should definitely kill of "Next" ... i would suggest just removing it,
> and not bulk applying a new version (there is no requirement that issues
> have a version)
Chris, in JIRA, "Next" has this description:
> Placeholder for commiters
: and substitute either 3.2 or 4.0. Speaking of which, I think simply
: assigning a fix-version for "3.2" implies that it will be for any future
: release (including 4.0) and so I don't see there's a point in assigning both
: of these fix-versions. There are rare exceptions to this and I am awar
: It'd be nice if Jira could auto-magically treat Next as whatever
: release really is "next". EG, say we all agree 3.2 is our next
: release, then ideally Jira would treat all Next issues as if they were
: marked with 3.2.
FWIW: you can rename jira versions w/o losing information about what
is
arked as Closed for "Next". Some house cleaning is in
>> order.
>
> We should clean these up. Should we just roll them over to 3.2?
>
> Mike
>
> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>
> -
>
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:12 AM, David Smiley (@MITRE.org)
wrote:
> (Comments on SOLR-2191 between Mark & I were starting to get off-topic with
> respect to the issue so I am continuing the conversation here)
>
> A lot of JIRA issues seem to fall off the radar, IMO. I'm talking about
> issues th
(Comments on SOLR-2191 between Mark & I were starting to get off-topic with
respect to the issue so I am continuing the conversation here)
A lot of JIRA issues seem to fall off the radar, IMO. I'm talking about
issues that have patches and are basically ready to go. There are multiple
ways to add
11 matches
Mail list logo
