Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
25 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Kay Schenk-2
To our BZ admins.

We seem to have a number of issues in BZ that are now listed
as Resolved/Fixed but don't seem to pertain to an actual
upcoming release.

Examples:
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126652
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126828

Can we add something like "N/A" or the like to our Target
Milestone field rather than the default "--" so we know
these should never be considered for a release?

Thanks.
--
--------------------------------------------
MzK

"Time spent with cats is never wasted."
                   -- Sigmund Freud

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Andrea Pescetti-2
Kay Schenk wrote:
> We seem to have a number of issues in BZ that are now listed
> as Resolved/Fixed but don't seem to pertain to an actual
> upcoming release.

Everything that was marked RESOLVED FIXED will be in 4.2.0. So 4.2.0 is
a perfectly valid value for these cases.

Just to be clear: 4.1.2 was a maintenance release and issues had to be
approved as release blockers in that case. 4.2.0 will be a normal
release, made from trunk, so everything that is on trunk (untile a
certain moment when we will decide to branch) will be into it
automatically. So the target is 4.2.0 in those cases.

Regards,
   Andrea.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Marcus (OOo)
In reply to this post by Kay Schenk-2
Am 03/20/2016 09:08 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:

> We seem to have a number of issues in BZ that are now listed
> as Resolved/Fixed but don't seem to pertain to an actual
> upcoming release.
>
> Examples:
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126652
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126828
>
> Can we add something like "N/A" or the like to our Target
> Milestone field rather than the default "--" so we know
> these should never be considered for a release?

sounds reasonable. I've added an "None" to the list of available
milestones for many products (the application modules and related things).

Marcus


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Dennis E. Hamilton
In reply to this post by Andrea Pescetti-2
I want to clarify this.

I think the problem might be that "Resolved - Fixed" is being used incorrectly. As far as I know, there are many cases where this resolution is used where one of "Resolved - Not an Issue" (though not too often), "Resolved - Irreproducible", "Resolved - Won't Fix", or "Resolved - Obsolete" should be used.

Is that what you are seeing, Kay?

In those cases, it is preferable to change the resolution.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 14:09
> To: [hidden email]; [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field
>
> Kay Schenk wrote:
> > We seem to have a number of issues in BZ that are now listed
> > as Resolved/Fixed but don't seem to pertain to an actual
> > upcoming release.
>
> Everything that was marked RESOLVED FIXED will be in 4.2.0. So 4.2.0 is
> a perfectly valid value for these cases.
>
> Just to be clear: 4.1.2 was a maintenance release and issues had to be
> approved as release blockers in that case. 4.2.0 will be a normal
> release, made from trunk, so everything that is on trunk (untile a
> certain moment when we will decide to branch) will be into it
> automatically. So the target is 4.2.0 in those cases.
>
> Regards,
>    Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Dennis E. Hamilton
In reply to this post by Marcus (OOo)
Thanks for the "None" Target, Marcus.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marcus [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 15:38
> To: [hidden email]
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field
>
> Am 03/20/2016 09:08 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
> > We seem to have a number of issues in BZ that are now listed
> > as Resolved/Fixed but don't seem to pertain to an actual
> > upcoming release.
> >
> > Examples:
> > https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126652
> > https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126828
> >
> > Can we add something like "N/A" or the like to our Target
> > Milestone field rather than the default "--" so we know
> > these should never be considered for a release?
>
> sounds reasonable. I've added an "None" to the list of available
> milestones for many products (the application modules and related
> things).
>
> Marcus
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Fwd: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Kay Schenk-2
In reply to this post by Dennis E. Hamilton
Forgot to copy qa on my reply.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Kay Schenk <[hidden email]>
Date: Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 8:59 AM
Subject: Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field
To: OOo Apache <[hidden email]>, Dennis Hamilton <
[hidden email]>



On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <[hidden email]
> wrote:

> I want to clarify this.
>
> I think the problem might be that "Resolved - Fixed" is being used
> incorrectly. As far as I know, there are many cases where this resolution
> is used where one of "Resolved - Not an Issue" (though not too often),
> "Resolved - Irreproducible", "Resolved - Won't Fix", or "Resolved -
> Obsolete" should be used.
>
> Is that what you are seeing, Kay?
>

​Well  maybe so. In the past, I have used RESOLVED-FIXED to determine
what's been committed to our source, thus leading to a Target Release.
Yesterday, I started going through RESOLVED-FIXED items to be sure some of
these fixed issued did have a Target Release. Some of these RESOLVED-FIXED
issues seem to be either user support issues/questions that do not entail
source code corrections at all, or similar type situations. In one of the
cases I sited above, I think the issue originator marked it with
RESOLVED-FIXED, and really i don't know if this was the right thing to do
or not.

So, we can use the new NONE (thank you Marcus!) as the Target Release, or
do something else to ignore these types of issues for verification in a
build.
The problem is stemming from the use of BZ as both a code centric problem
reporting mechanism and a user support tool.


>
> In those cases, it is preferable to change the resolution.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:[hidden email]]
> > Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 14:09
> > To: [hidden email]; [hidden email]
> > Subject: Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field
> >
> > Kay Schenk wrote:
> > > We seem to have a number of issues in BZ that are now listed
> > > as Resolved/Fixed but don't seem to pertain to an actual
> > > upcoming release.
> >
> > Everything that was marked RESOLVED FIXED will be in 4.2.0. So 4.2.0 is
> > a perfectly valid value for these cases.
> >
> > Just to be clear: 4.1.2 was a maintenance release and issues had to be
> > approved as release blockers in that case. 4.2.0 will be a normal
> > release, made from trunk, so everything that is on trunk (untile a
> > certain moment when we will decide to branch) will be into it
> > automatically. So the target is 4.2.0 in those cases.
> >
> > Regards,
> >    Andrea.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK

"Time spent with cats is never wasted."
                                -- Sigmund Freud




--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK

"Time spent with cats is never wasted."
                                -- Sigmund Freud
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Kay Schenk-2
In reply to this post by Dennis E. Hamilton
[top posting]

Thanks for all the help with this and for the new NONE for
target release. Hopefully, it will be used sparingly
assuming we us e RESOLVED-FIXED as only for issues in which
an actual commit is used. Issue 126828 has now been changed
to UNCONFIRMED. How to differentiate UNCONFIRMED from
RESOLVED--NOT AN ISSUE will be a challenge. Hopefully, this
can be clarified to our QA helpers

And, dang, one my examples was NOT a correct illustration of
the problem. Too many BZ windows open yesterday I guess.

Ok, back to my investigations.

On 03/21/2016 12:05 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

>
>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Patricia Shanahan
>> [mailto:[hidden email]] Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016
>> 09:10 To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: Can we
>> add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field
>>
>> On 3/21/2016 8:59 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>> On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>> <[hidden email]
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I want to clarify this.
>>>>
>>>> I think the problem might be that "Resolved -
>>>> Fixed" is being used incorrectly. As far as I know,
>>>> there are many cases where this
>> resolution
>>>> is used where one of "Resolved - Not an Issue"
>>>> (though not too
>> often),
>>>> "Resolved - Irreproducible", "Resolved - Won't
>>>> Fix", or "Resolved - Obsolete" should be used.
>>>>
>>>> Is that what you are seeing, Kay?
>>>>
>>>
>>> ​Well  maybe so. In the past, I have used
>>> RESOLVED-FIXED to determine what's been committed to
>>> our source, thus leading to a Target Release.
>>> Yesterday, I started going through RESOLVED-FIXED
>>> items to be sure
>> some of
>>> these fixed issued did have a Target Release. Some of
>>> these RESOLVED-
>> FIXED
>>> issues seem to be either user support
>>> issues/questions that do not
>> entail
>>> source code corrections at all, or similar type
>>> situations. In one of
>> the
>>> cases I sited above, I think the issue originator
>>> marked it with RESOLVED-FIXED, and really i don't
>>> know if this was the right thing to
>> do
>>> or not.
> [orcmid]
>
> My impression is that original reporters rarely do this
> and might not even have the necessary karma.
>
> As you can see in one of the two you linked to, I was the
> guilty culprit [;<).
>
>>>
>>> So, we can use the new NONE (thank you Marcus!) as
>>> the Target Release,
>> or
>>> do something else to ignore these types of issues for
>>> verification in
>> a
>>> build. The problem is stemming from the use of BZ as
>>> both a code centric
>> problem
>>> reporting mechanism and a user support tool.
>>
>> I don't think it should be marked RESOLVED-FIXED unless
>> it was actually fixed, and therefore has a release in
>> which the fix first appears. To me, RESOLVED-FIXED with
>> a target release of NONE is self-contradictory.
>>
>> What is the objection to changing the resolution to
>> reflect reality?
>>
>> For example, if it was a user support issue that does
>> not entail a source code correction, shouldn't it be
>> marked RESOLVED - NOT_AN_ISSUE rather than RESOLVED -
>> FIXED with a target date of NONE?
> [orcmid]
>
> I agree that RESOLVED - FIXED might be inappropriate in
> many cases.  However, RESOLVED - NOT AN ISSUE is often
> too heavy-handed.  It can clearly be an issue to users,
> especially when it is an identifiable usability matter
> although not a code bug, but still there may be some
> clear product-behavior deficiency.  And the issue may be
> recognized as such by the project, too.
>
> The problem is "Issue for Whom," when it is about a
> deficiency in the product but not a bug in the
> conventional sense.  Since we our software is
> user-facing, it would be good to own that such issues are
> issues for us as providers of something valuable to
> users. BZ is our basic mechanism for existence and
> attention to such cases.
>
> I also recall seeing "NOT AN ISSUE" used when
> IRREPRODUCIBLE might be a better matter (i.e., when the
> reporter fails to provide needed details to know
> specifically what the matter is).
>
> Also, sometimes the "fix" is elsewhere (i.e.,
> documentation, workarounds on a wiki, whatever).  I
> suppose that means CONFIRMED but not acted on until
> cleared up somehow, or a WONT-FIX that indicates the
> workaround is all that is coming.
>
> I think it comes down to specific cases.  The ability to
> have a RESOLVED-FIXED with a "None" release target is
> useful, and we now have it available.  We just need to
> use it appropriately.  It just means that the fix is
> other than in a code release.
>
> We also need to make clear what the general uses of these
> categories are.  That may already exist somewhere but it
> perhaps need to be surfaced more and promoted on the QA
> and DEV lists.
>
>>
>> Patricia
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> [hidden email]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> [hidden email]
>

--
--------------------------------------------
MzK

"Time spent with cats is never wasted."
                   -- Sigmund Freud

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Marcus (OOo)
Am 03/21/2016 10:36 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
> [top posting]
>
> Thanks for all the help with this and for the new NONE for
> target release. Hopefully, it will be used sparingly
> assuming we us e RESOLVED-FIXED as only for issues in which
> an actual commit is used. Issue 126828 has now been changed
> to UNCONFIRMED. How to differentiate UNCONFIRMED from
> RESOLVED--NOT AN ISSUE will be a challenge. Hopefully, this
> can be clarified to our QA helpers

I repeat my suggestion for another resolution status as it maybe got
lost in people's inboxes.

My suggestion is to create a RESOLVED - RESOLVED status. Maybe still to
close to RESOLVED - FIXED, but then let's see if there are better wordings.

Instead of setting to a status that doesn't make sense or to
differentiate together with another field (like the target), why not
setting an user issue that could be resolved to a status that actually
show this.

Marcus



> And, dang, one my examples was NOT a correct illustration of
> the problem. Too many BZ windows open yesterday I guess.
>
> Ok, back to my investigations.
>
> On 03/21/2016 12:05 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message----- From: Patricia Shanahan
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016
>>> 09:10 To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: Can we
>>> add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field
>>>
>>> On 3/21/2016 8:59 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>>> <[hidden email]
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I want to clarify this.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think the problem might be that "Resolved -
>>>>> Fixed" is being used incorrectly. As far as I know,
>>>>> there are many cases where this
>>> resolution
>>>>> is used where one of "Resolved - Not an Issue"
>>>>> (though not too
>>> often),
>>>>> "Resolved - Irreproducible", "Resolved - Won't
>>>>> Fix", or "Resolved - Obsolete" should be used.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is that what you are seeing, Kay?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ​Well  maybe so. In the past, I have used
>>>> RESOLVED-FIXED to determine what's been committed to
>>>> our source, thus leading to a Target Release.
>>>> Yesterday, I started going through RESOLVED-FIXED
>>>> items to be sure
>>> some of
>>>> these fixed issued did have a Target Release. Some of
>>>> these RESOLVED-
>>> FIXED
>>>> issues seem to be either user support
>>>> issues/questions that do not
>>> entail
>>>> source code corrections at all, or similar type
>>>> situations. In one of
>>> the
>>>> cases I sited above, I think the issue originator
>>>> marked it with RESOLVED-FIXED, and really i don't
>>>> know if this was the right thing to
>>> do
>>>> or not.
>> [orcmid]
>>
>> My impression is that original reporters rarely do this
>> and might not even have the necessary karma.
>>
>> As you can see in one of the two you linked to, I was the
>> guilty culprit [;<).
>>
>>>>
>>>> So, we can use the new NONE (thank you Marcus!) as
>>>> the Target Release,
>>> or
>>>> do something else to ignore these types of issues for
>>>> verification in
>>> a
>>>> build. The problem is stemming from the use of BZ as
>>>> both a code centric
>>> problem
>>>> reporting mechanism and a user support tool.
>>>
>>> I don't think it should be marked RESOLVED-FIXED unless
>>> it was actually fixed, and therefore has a release in
>>> which the fix first appears. To me, RESOLVED-FIXED with
>>> a target release of NONE is self-contradictory.
>>>
>>> What is the objection to changing the resolution to
>>> reflect reality?
>>>
>>> For example, if it was a user support issue that does
>>> not entail a source code correction, shouldn't it be
>>> marked RESOLVED - NOT_AN_ISSUE rather than RESOLVED -
>>> FIXED with a target date of NONE?
>> [orcmid]
>>
>> I agree that RESOLVED - FIXED might be inappropriate in
>> many cases.  However, RESOLVED - NOT AN ISSUE is often
>> too heavy-handed.  It can clearly be an issue to users,
>> especially when it is an identifiable usability matter
>> although not a code bug, but still there may be some
>> clear product-behavior deficiency.  And the issue may be
>> recognized as such by the project, too.
>>
>> The problem is "Issue for Whom," when it is about a
>> deficiency in the product but not a bug in the
>> conventional sense.  Since we our software is
>> user-facing, it would be good to own that such issues are
>> issues for us as providers of something valuable to
>> users. BZ is our basic mechanism for existence and
>> attention to such cases.
>>
>> I also recall seeing "NOT AN ISSUE" used when
>> IRREPRODUCIBLE might be a better matter (i.e., when the
>> reporter fails to provide needed details to know
>> specifically what the matter is).
>>
>> Also, sometimes the "fix" is elsewhere (i.e.,
>> documentation, workarounds on a wiki, whatever).  I
>> suppose that means CONFIRMED but not acted on until
>> cleared up somehow, or a WONT-FIX that indicates the
>> workaround is all that is coming.
>>
>> I think it comes down to specific cases.  The ability to
>> have a RESOLVED-FIXED with a "None" release target is
>> useful, and we now have it available.  We just need to
>> use it appropriately.  It just means that the fix is
>> other than in a code release.
>>
>> We also need to make clear what the general uses of these
>> categories are.  That may already exist somewhere but it
>> perhaps need to be surfaced more and promoted on the QA
>> and DEV lists.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Pedro Lino
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 10:32 PM, Marcus <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Am 03/21/2016 10:36 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>
>> [top posting]
>>
>> Thanks for all the help with this and for the new NONE for
>> target release. Hopefully, it will be used sparingly
>> assuming we us e RESOLVED-FIXED as only for issues in which
>> an actual commit is used. Issue 126828 has now been changed
>> to UNCONFIRMED. How to differentiate UNCONFIRMED from
>> RESOLVED--NOT AN ISSUE will be a challenge. Hopefully, this
>> can be clarified to our QA helpers
>>
>
> I repeat my suggestion for another resolution status as it maybe got lost
> in people's inboxes.
>
> My suggestion is to create a RESOLVED - RESOLVED status. Maybe still to
> close to RESOLVED - FIXED, but then let's see if there are better wordings.
>

There is already a final status after RESOLVED - FIXED. It's VERIFIED -
FIXED. It is set after a QA member verifies that the fix actually solved
the problem and that it does not occur in the RC.

Hope this helps.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Marcus (OOo)
Am 03/22/2016 12:30 AM, schrieb Pedro Lino:

> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 10:32 PM, Marcus<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>
>> Am 03/21/2016 10:36 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>>
>>> [top posting]
>>>
>>> Thanks for all the help with this and for the new NONE for
>>> target release. Hopefully, it will be used sparingly
>>> assuming we us e RESOLVED-FIXED as only for issues in which
>>> an actual commit is used. Issue 126828 has now been changed
>>> to UNCONFIRMED. How to differentiate UNCONFIRMED from
>>> RESOLVED--NOT AN ISSUE will be a challenge. Hopefully, this
>>> can be clarified to our QA helpers
>>>
>>
>> I repeat my suggestion for another resolution status as it maybe got lost
>> in people's inboxes.
>>
>> My suggestion is to create a RESOLVED - RESOLVED status. Maybe still to
>> close to RESOLVED - FIXED, but then let's see if there are better wordings.
>>
>
> There is already a final status after RESOLVED - FIXED. It's VERIFIED -
> FIXED. It is set after a QA member verifies that the fix actually solved
> the problem and that it does not occur in the RC.
>
> Hope this helps.

no, that's not what I meant. ;-)

It's not about to draw the line between issues that are resolved and
verified solutions. It's about to differentiate issues that are in the
real application and therefore need to be fixed in the source code. Here
we use (or better should use) RESOLVED - FIXED.

But what about issues that are also reporting a problem but the solution
(if there is any) is somewhere else? RESOLVED - FIXED doesn't fit,
RESOLVED - NOT_AN_ISSUE also not.

Therefore I suggested a new status RESOLVED - RESOLVED.

I hope this explains it better.

Marcus

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Pedro Lino
> It's not about to draw the line between issues that are resolved and
> verified solutions. It's about to differentiate issues that are in the real
> application and therefore need to be fixed in the source code. Here we use
> (or better should use) RESOLVED - FIXED.
>
> But what about issues that are also reporting a problem but the solution
> (if there is any) is somewhere else? RESOLVED - FIXED doesn't fit, RESOLVED
> - NOT_AN_ISSUE also not.
>

Why not use the same nomenclature as the "sibling project"? RESOLVED -
NOTOURBUG

I believe Apache QA needs a flowchart such as
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/c/c4/Unconfirmed_Bugs_Status_Flowchart_Version_0.1.pdf
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/c/cb/Unconfirmed_Bugs_Status_Flowchart.odg
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Dennis E. Hamilton

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pedro Lino [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 16:53
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field
>
> > It's not about to draw the line between issues that are resolved and
> > verified solutions. It's about to differentiate issues that are in the
> real
> > application and therefore need to be fixed in the source code. Here we
> use
> > (or better should use) RESOLVED - FIXED.
> >
> > But what about issues that are also reporting a problem but the
> solution
> > (if there is any) is somewhere else? RESOLVED - FIXED doesn't fit,
> RESOLVED
> > - NOT_AN_ISSUE also not.
> >
>
> Why not use the same nomenclature as the "sibling project"? RESOLVED -
> NOTOURBUG
[orcmid]

It seems to me that RESOLVED - RESOLVED is too mysterious and RESOLVED - NOTOURBUG is not much better than NOTANISSUE.

RESOLVED - HANDLED might be closer, with the comment that achieves this explains how it is handled.  (I.e., documentation, workaround, whatever.)
 
I'm not in love with that term and don't know how it works for non-native English-language participants.

>
> I believe Apache QA needs a flowchart such as
>
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/c/c4/Unconfirmed_Bugs_Status_ Flowchart_Version_0.1.pdf
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/c/cb/Unconfirmed_Bugs_Status_Flowchart.odg
[orcmid]

That's a useful companion topic.  (The PDF is apparently defective - Acrobat Reader doesn't see anything in it on Windows.)

The .odg works though. I don't like that flowchart much.  I don't think it covers the range that is needed for us.   Perhaps it is incomplete and just deals with the front-end of issue triage?




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Marcus (OOo)
In reply to this post by Pedro Lino
Am 03/22/2016 12:52 AM, schrieb Pedro Lino:

>> It's not about to draw the line between issues that are resolved and
>> verified solutions. It's about to differentiate issues that are in the real
>> application and therefore need to be fixed in the source code. Here we use
>> (or better should use) RESOLVED - FIXED.
>>
>> But what about issues that are also reporting a problem but the solution
>> (if there is any) is somewhere else? RESOLVED - FIXED doesn't fit, RESOLVED
>> - NOT_AN_ISSUE also not.
>>
>
> Why not use the same nomenclature as the "sibling project"? RESOLVED -
> NOTOURBUG

in general it's OK to look for other projects how they handle such
problems. But NOTOURBUG sounds really ignorant and a bit offensive - at
east in my ears. When I think about the users that reporting such issues
and mostly they think it's important because they cannot go on with
their work, then they deserve a more meaningful status name.

Dennis has made a good suggestion where I'll go on with answering.

> I believe Apache QA needs a flowchart such as
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/c/c4/Unconfirmed_Bugs_Status_Flowchart_Version_0.1.pdf
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/c/cb/Unconfirmed_Bugs_Status_Flowchart.odg

I'm pretty sure we have a similar flow chart somewhere in the depths of
our Wiki. But yes, in general this would help to understand how the
issue statuses are working together.

Marcus


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Marcus (OOo)
In reply to this post by Dennis E. Hamilton
Am 03/22/2016 03:37 AM, schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton:

>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Pedro Lino [mailto:[hidden email]]
>> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 16:53
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Subject: Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field
>>
>>> It's not about to draw the line between issues that are resolved and
>>> verified solutions. It's about to differentiate issues that are in the
>> real
>>> application and therefore need to be fixed in the source code. Here we
>> use
>>> (or better should use) RESOLVED - FIXED.
>>>
>>> But what about issues that are also reporting a problem but the
>> solution
>>> (if there is any) is somewhere else? RESOLVED - FIXED doesn't fit,
>> RESOLVED
>>> - NOT_AN_ISSUE also not.
>>>
>>
>> Why not use the same nomenclature as the "sibling project"? RESOLVED -
>> NOTOURBUG
> [orcmid]
>
> It seems to me that RESOLVED - RESOLVED is too mysterious and RESOLVED - NOTOURBUG is not much better than NOTANISSUE.
>
> RESOLVED - HANDLED might be closer, with the comment that achieves this explains how it is handled.  (I.e., documentation, workaround, whatever.)
>
> I'm not in love with that term and don't know how it works for non-native English-language participants.

I like it as it is more general. However, what about RESOLVED - MANAGED?
This word is maybe better known in the world. This term shows that the
issue has some work in it and was tackled. With a closing comment you
can see where and why it was successful managed (resolved).

>> I believe Apache QA needs a flowchart such as
>>
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/c/c4/Unconfirmed_Bugs_Status_ Flowchart_Version_0.1.pdf
>> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/c/cb/Unconfirmed_Bugs_Status_Flowchart.odg
> [orcmid]

Marcus


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Marcus (OOo)
Am 03/22/2016 10:00 AM, schrieb Marcus:

> Am 03/22/2016 03:37 AM, schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton:
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Pedro Lino [mailto:[hidden email]]
>>> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 16:53
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field
>>>
>>>> It's not about to draw the line between issues that are resolved and
>>>> verified solutions. It's about to differentiate issues that are in the
>>> real
>>>> application and therefore need to be fixed in the source code. Here we
>>> use
>>>> (or better should use) RESOLVED - FIXED.
>>>>
>>>> But what about issues that are also reporting a problem but the
>>> solution
>>>> (if there is any) is somewhere else? RESOLVED - FIXED doesn't fit,
>>> RESOLVED
>>>> - NOT_AN_ISSUE also not.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why not use the same nomenclature as the "sibling project"? RESOLVED -
>>> NOTOURBUG
>> [orcmid]
>>
>> It seems to me that RESOLVED - RESOLVED is too mysterious and RESOLVED
>> - NOTOURBUG is not much better than NOTANISSUE.
>>
>> RESOLVED - HANDLED might be closer, with the comment that achieves
>> this explains how it is handled. (I.e., documentation, workaround,
>> whatever.)
>>
>> I'm not in love with that term and don't know how it works for
>> non-native English-language participants.
>
> I like it as it is more general. However, what about RESOLVED - MANAGED?
> This word is maybe better known in the world. This term shows that the
> issue has some work in it and was tackled. With a closing comment you
> can see where and why it was successful managed (resolved).

from Jira I also know that RESOLVED - DONE is a common way to say that
an issue was successfully resolved.

Marcus


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Pedro Lino
> It seems to me that RESOLVED - RESOLVED is too mysterious and RESOLVED
>>> - NOTOURBUG is not much better than NOTANISSUE.
>>>
>>> RESOLVED - HANDLED might be closer, with the comment that achieves
>>> this explains how it is handled. (I.e., documentation, workaround,
>>> whatever.)
>>>
>>> I'm not in love with that term and don't know how it works for
>>> non-native English-language participants.
>>>
>>
>> I like it as it is more general. However, what about RESOLVED - MANAGED?
>> This word is maybe better known in the world. This term shows that the
>> issue has some work in it and was tackled. With a closing comment you
>> can see where and why it was successful managed (resolved).
>>
>
> from Jira I also know that RESOLVED - DONE is a common way to say that an
> issue was successfully resolved.
>

NOT_AN_ISSUE seems a bad option. The problem which is affecting someone is
dismissed. In my opinion it is as as offensive as WORKSFORME (used in
LibreOffice) and WONT_FIX (used in both projects)

HANDLED, MANAGED only applies if there are workarounds (which is not always
the case).

NOTOURBUG means that the Devs looked at it and although they recognize it's
a problem, there is nothing they can do because the problem is somewhere
else.
I agree it's a but short and rough but it's difficult to be nice and
meaningful with a single word (or glued words). This can be further
explained in the Comments when changing status if the developer is in such
a mood...

NOTABUG could be used instead of WONT_FIX (when it's reported as a bug but
AOO decides it is working as expected) and DECLINED when it's a
suggestion/enhancement (and AOO decides it is not interesting/productive)

Just my 2 cents ;)
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

David Goldfield-2
Hi. I'll be switching email addresses and I'd like to know if there's an email address I can use for a quick unsubscribe from this list.



David Goldfield
919 Walnut Street

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19107

215-627-0600
FAX: 215-922-0692
mailto:[hidden email]
http://www.asb.org
Amazon Smiles ASB
http://www.asb.org/images/Amazon_Smiles.jpg
Serving Philadelphia's and the nation's blind and visually impaired population since 1874.
-----Original Message-----
From: Pedro Lino [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 6:57 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

> It seems to me that RESOLVED - RESOLVED is too mysterious and RESOLVED
>>> - NOTOURBUG is not much better than NOTANISSUE.
>>>
>>> RESOLVED - HANDLED might be closer, with the comment that achieves
>>> this explains how it is handled. (I.e., documentation, workaround,
>>> whatever.)
>>>
>>> I'm not in love with that term and don't know how it works for
>>> non-native English-language participants.
>>>
>>
>> I like it as it is more general. However, what about RESOLVED - MANAGED?
>> This word is maybe better known in the world. This term shows that
>> the issue has some work in it and was tackled. With a closing comment
>> you can see where and why it was successful managed (resolved).
>>
>
> from Jira I also know that RESOLVED - DONE is a common way to say that
> an issue was successfully resolved.
>

NOT_AN_ISSUE seems a bad option. The problem which is affecting someone is dismissed. In my opinion it is as as offensive as WORKSFORME (used in
LibreOffice) and WONT_FIX (used in both projects)

HANDLED, MANAGED only applies if there are workarounds (which is not always the case).

NOTOURBUG means that the Devs looked at it and although they recognize it's a problem, there is nothing they can do because the problem is somewhere else.
I agree it's a but short and rough but it's difficult to be nice and meaningful with a single word (or glued words). This can be further explained in the Comments when changing status if the developer is in such a mood...

NOTABUG could be used instead of WONT_FIX (when it's reported as a bug but AOO decides it is working as expected) and DECLINED when it's a suggestion/enhancement (and AOO decides it is not interesting/productive)

Just my 2 cents ;)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Dennis E. Hamilton
In reply to this post by Marcus (OOo)
Many interesting ideas, ...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carl Marcum [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 03:35
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field
>
> On 03/22/2016 05:02 AM, Marcus wrote:
> > Am 03/22/2016 10:00 AM, schrieb Marcus:
[ ,,, ]

> >> [ ... ] what about RESOLVED -
> MANAGED?
> >> This word is maybe better known in the world. This term shows that
> the
> >> issue has some work in it and was tackled. With a closing comment you
> >> can see where and why it was successful managed (resolved).
> >
> > from Jira I also know that RESOLVED - DONE is a common way to say that
> > an issue was successfully resolved.
> >
> > Marcus
> >
> Having a RESOLVED - DONE would be especially good for tasks also.
>
[orcmid]

MANAGED is interesting because of its flexibility. How it was managed should be accounted for in the commentary.

DONE does seem to apply to Tasks and Enhancement requests.

DECLINED also seems to apply to both Tasks and Enhancements.  It is also a counterpart to ACCEPTED in those cases.

At qa@ Pedro Lino made some useful observations about how terms impact reporters and observers of the Bugzilla activity.

In respect to that, I have been using WONTFIX as a way to indicate that we have no capacity to do anything about an issue, especially a longstanding one.  This is primarily a way of discouraging non-project commenters arguing among themselves and to also indicate that the issue is understood, recognized, and continued lobbying is not useful.  I think DECLINED may be useful in some of those cases, but WONTFIX is more truthful when the project doesn't have a way to do anything.  NOTFIXING is closer to the reality.  (CANTFIX would also indicate that the problem is not with the issue, but with project capability at this time.)  The door is not closed completely, but it is not clear when the door will ever be opened.

I agree that we do need a diagram and a description of the general application of Bugzilla categories and resolution cases.  We might also need to revisit how the search defaults work with respect to the various categories.  This seems like a good Wiki [update] effort.  We also don't want to split things into so many categories that application and understanding becomes more difficult.

Looking forward to the further discussion,

 - Dennis



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Dennis E. Hamilton
In reply to this post by David Goldfield-2
So long as you still have use of the old email address, you can do this.

    Using the old email address, send a message to
    <[hidden email]> with UNSUBSCRIBE in the
    subject and body.  A message will be sent to that email asking
    for confirmation.  Reply to that message in the manner specified
    and it should work.

Note that [hidden email] is not subscribed to this (qa@) list and you will need to subscribe it if you intend to follow the list in the future.

If you don't have use of the old address, you need to tell us what it is so that we can show you how to unsubscribe it.

 - Dennis



> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Goldfield [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 05:42
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: RE: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field
>
> Hi. I'll be switching email addresses and I'd like to know if there's an
> email address I can use for a quick unsubscribe from this list.
>
>
>
> David Goldfield
> 919 Walnut Street
>
> Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19107
>
> 215-627-0600
> FAX: 215-922-0692
> mailto:[hidden email]
> http://www.asb.org
> Amazon Smiles ASB
> http://www.asb.org/images/Amazon_Smiles.jpg
> Serving Philadelphia's and the nation's blind and visually impaired
> population since 1874.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pedro Lino [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 6:57 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field
>
> > It seems to me that RESOLVED - RESOLVED is too mysterious and RESOLVED
> >>> - NOTOURBUG is not much better than NOTANISSUE.
> >>>
> >>> RESOLVED - HANDLED might be closer, with the comment that achieves
> >>> this explains how it is handled. (I.e., documentation, workaround,
> >>> whatever.)
> >>>
> >>> I'm not in love with that term and don't know how it works for
> >>> non-native English-language participants.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I like it as it is more general. However, what about RESOLVED -
> MANAGED?
> >> This word is maybe better known in the world. This term shows that
> >> the issue has some work in it and was tackled. With a closing comment
> >> you can see where and why it was successful managed (resolved).
> >>
> >
> > from Jira I also know that RESOLVED - DONE is a common way to say that
> > an issue was successfully resolved.
> >
>
> NOT_AN_ISSUE seems a bad option. The problem which is affecting someone
> is dismissed. In my opinion it is as as offensive as WORKSFORME (used in
> LibreOffice) and WONT_FIX (used in both projects)
>
> HANDLED, MANAGED only applies if there are workarounds (which is not
> always the case).
>
> NOTOURBUG means that the Devs looked at it and although they recognize
> it's a problem, there is nothing they can do because the problem is
> somewhere else.
> I agree it's a but short and rough but it's difficult to be nice and
> meaningful with a single word (or glued words). This can be further
> explained in the Comments when changing status if the developer is in
> such a mood...
>
> NOTABUG could be used instead of WONT_FIX (when it's reported as a bug
> but AOO decides it is working as expected) and DECLINED when it's a
> suggestion/enhancement (and AOO decides it is not
> interesting/productive)
>
> Just my 2 cents ;)
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

Marcus (OOo)
In reply to this post by Pedro Lino
Am 03/22/2016 11:56 AM, schrieb Pedro Lino:

>> It seems to me that RESOLVED - RESOLVED is too mysterious and RESOLVED
>>>> - NOTOURBUG is not much better than NOTANISSUE.
>>>>
>>>> RESOLVED - HANDLED might be closer, with the comment that achieves
>>>> this explains how it is handled. (I.e., documentation, workaround,
>>>> whatever.)
>>>>
>>>> I'm not in love with that term and don't know how it works for
>>>> non-native English-language participants.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I like it as it is more general. However, what about RESOLVED - MANAGED?
>>> This word is maybe better known in the world. This term shows that the
>>> issue has some work in it and was tackled. With a closing comment you
>>> can see where and why it was successful managed (resolved).
>>>
>>
>> from Jira I also know that RESOLVED - DONE is a common way to say that an
>> issue was successfully resolved.
>>
>
> NOT_AN_ISSUE seems a bad option. The problem which is affecting someone is
> dismissed. In my opinion it is as as offensive as WORKSFORME (used in
> LibreOffice) and WONT_FIX (used in both projects)

+1 and additionally it doesn't show that the issue was solved.

> HANDLED, MANAGED only applies if there are workarounds (which is not always
> the case).

No, I see this different. For me the wording is more general. So, it's
not that important if there is a real solution or workaround or whatever
for the iassue.

> NOTOURBUG means that the Devs looked at it and although they recognize it's
> a problem, there is nothing they can do because the problem is somewhere
> else.
> I agree it's a but short and rough but it's difficult to be nice and
> meaningful with a single word (or glued words). This can be further
> explained in the Comments when changing status if the developer is in such
> a mood...
>
> NOTABUG could be used instead of WONT_FIX (when it's reported as a bug but
> AOO decides it is working as expected) and DECLINED when it's a
> suggestion/enhancement (and AOO decides it is not interesting/productive)

Additionally with NOTOURBUG and NOTABUG you cannot see that the issue
has a workable and accepted solution. But this is a key point of this
whole discussion.

OK, it seems you also like the idea to have another resolution status -
it just depends on what the name is, right? ;-)

Marcus

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

12