I checked the actions workflow in the OFBIZ-3628, and thanks to Gavin all seems
OK now
Jacques
From: "Jacques Le Roux"
Thanks for clarifying Bob
Jacques
Bob Morley wrote:
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Done at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2586
But it seems there is still an issue.
Thanks for clarifying Bob
Jacques
Bob Morley wrote:
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Done at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2586
But it seems there is still an issue...
Jacques
Hey -- It seems that the ticket we pointed INFRA to had a original request
for the "Patch Available" workflow
A-2586 ticket and hopefully Gavin
will revert the "tick" and go with the workflow status.
--
View this message in context:
http://n4.nabble.com/Use-of-JIRA-Resolved-status-tp1747129p1749411.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
View this message in context:
http://n4.nabble.com/Use-of-JIRA-Resolved-status-tp1747129p1747620.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Ofbiz consensus and the
> right person cutting the INFRA ticket. My guess is that David Jones likely
> setup our ASF JIRA project and is likely our JIRA admin? (I seem to recall
> reading something that suggested a project could have two admins; but I do
> not recall).
> --
> View t
ight person cutting the INFRA ticket. My guess is that David Jones likely
setup our ASF JIRA project and is likely our JIRA admin? (I seem to recall
reading something that suggested a project could have two admins; but I do
not recall).
--
View this message in context:
http://n4.nabble.com/Use-o
and is likely our JIRA admin? (I seem to recall
reading something that suggested a project could have two admins; but I do
not recall).
--
View this message in context:
http://n4.nabble.com/Use-of-JIRA-Resolved-status-tp1747129p1747620.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
t; I suspect I should have put a comment in them saying that they were ready
> for commit though as opposed to moving to reopen for further work ...
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://n4.nabble.com/Use-of-JIRA-Resolved-status-tp1747129p1747352.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
pen.
I suspect I should have put a comment in them saying that they were ready
for commit though as opposed to moving to reopen for further work ...
--
View this message in context:
http://n4.nabble.com/Use-of-JIRA-Resolved-status-tp1747129p1747352.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Scott Gray-2 wrote:
>
> Might help:
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles
>
Thanks Scott that explains the roles perfectly.
--
View this message in context:
http://n4.nabble.com/Use-of-JIRA-Resolved-status-tp1747129p1747324.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev
Bob Morley wrote:
Adam Heath-2 wrote:
Your use of Resolved is not correct. I reference
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ShowConstantsHelp.jspa?decorator=popup#StatusTypes.
Looking at that page, there doesn't seem to be a way for submitted to
be involved in the workflow whatsoever, beyond
On 31/03/2010, at 2:02 PM, Bob Morley wrote:
> My terming of a
> "contributor" vs. a "non-contributor" may be incorrect as well. Would you
> consider anyone in the community that provides code a contributor or would
> that be reserved for people with "commit" privilege?
Might help:
http://www.a
tches.
Wadaya think?
--
View this message in context:
http://n4.nabble.com/Use-of-JIRA-Resolved-status-tp1747129p1747306.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Bob Morley wrote:
> I am creating this from the discussion as part of ticket OFBIZ-3630.
>
> My issue as a non-contributor was that there is no way to distinguish
> tickets that are created vs. ones that a fix as been proposed and attached.
> This was important for me because it provided me a way
this message in context:
http://n4.nabble.com/Use-of-JIRA-Resolved-status-tp1747129p1747204.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Bob Morley wrote:
>
> Adam Heath-2 wrote:
>> Do a search for the reporter==you, and status==patch available, or
>> some other status.
>>
>
> Are you suggesting adding a new workflow status "patch available" or the use
> of a label? I would be in favor of a "Pending Review" or some similar
> stat
milar
status. Perhaps ...
Open -> In Progress -> Pending Review -> Resolved -> Closed
Where Resolved may be skipped by the contributor? This would also provide a
state where items may be reviewed by other contributors for large scale
changes, etc.
--
View this message in context:
http
Bob Morley wrote:
> I am creating this from the discussion as part of ticket OFBIZ-3630.
>
> My issue as a non-contributor was that there is no way to distinguish
> tickets that are created vs. ones that a fix as been proposed and attached.
> This was important for me because it provided me a way
The easiest
issue I can point to is OFBIZ-3100
(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3100) which has a big
collection of sub-tasks, some of which are closed, reopened, resolved, and
unresolved.
--
View this message in context:
http://n4.nabble.com/Use-of-JIRA-Resolved-status-tp1747129p174
19 matches
Mail list logo
