Hi, swift-dev et al (but especially Ted). I’ve recently noticed that our JIRA workflow has been a bit confusing. We currently have five “statuses":
1. Opened: This bug has been filed.
2. In Progress: Someone is actively working on this bug. (Not everyone has been bothering to set this, but it seems reasonable to have.)
3. Resolved: A fix has been merged to master.
4. Closed: The fix has been verified by the reporter.
5. Reopened: The “fix" doesn’t actually fix the reporter’s problem.
The problem is that the “Resolved” and “Closed” statuses aren’t really distinguished on the site itself—it’s unclear for a contributor which one they’re supposed to use when they get something merged, and it’s unclear for the reporter what they’re supposed to say. Therefore, I suggest changing the “Resolved” status to “Verify” (like we use in Radar) and the “Resolve Issue” button to “Mark Resolved”.
(There are other things unspecified here, such as how to track what release a fix gets into, or what the story is for the Assignee field, but we can discuss those later.)
Do we anticipate Verify being used in practice much?
Would it be better to simplify the workflow and just have a single "Resolved/Closed/Done" state? If the originator does test the bug and find it isn't fixed, they can reopen.
My guess is not that many people are going to actively look at their JIRA account to find bugs that they are supposed to be verifying.
- Daniel
···
On Aug 15, 2016, at 10:08 AM, Jordan Rose via swift-build-dev <swift-build-dev@swift.org> wrote:
Hi, swift-dev et al (but especially Ted). I’ve recently noticed that our JIRA workflow has been a bit confusing. We currently have five “statuses":
1. Opened: This bug has been filed.
2. In Progress: Someone is actively working on this bug. (Not everyone has been bothering to set this, but it seems reasonable to have.)
3. Resolved: A fix has been merged to master.
4. Closed: The fix has been verified by the reporter.
5. Reopened: The “fix" doesn’t actually fix the reporter’s problem.
The problem is that the “Resolved” and “Closed” statuses aren’t really distinguished on the site itself—it’s unclear for a contributor which one they’re supposed to use when they get something merged, and it’s unclear for the reporter what they’re supposed to say. Therefore, I suggest changing the “Resolved” status to “Verify” (like we use in Radar) and the “Resolve Issue” button to “Mark Resolved”.
(There are other things unspecified here, such as how to track what release a fix gets into, or what the story is for the Assignee field, but we can discuss those later.)
It hasn’t been used so much so far, but on the bugs where it has I like being able to tell the difference. I don’t think we’d poke people about verification like we do with Radar, though, so we will (and have) end up with a lot of bugs left in Resolved/Verify.
Jordan
···
On Aug 15, 2016, at 10:10, Daniel Dunbar <daniel_dunbar@apple.com> wrote:
Do we anticipate Verify being used in practice much?
Would it be better to simplify the workflow and just have a single "Resolved/Closed/Done" state? If the originator does test the bug and find it isn't fixed, they can reopen.
My guess is not that many people are going to actively look at their JIRA account to find bugs that they are supposed to be verifying.
- Daniel
On Aug 15, 2016, at 10:08 AM, Jordan Rose via swift-build-dev <swift-build-dev@swift.org <mailto:swift-build-dev@swift.org>> wrote:
Hi, swift-dev et al (but especially Ted). I’ve recently noticed that our JIRA workflow has been a bit confusing. We currently have five “statuses":
1. Opened: This bug has been filed.
2. In Progress: Someone is actively working on this bug. (Not everyone has been bothering to set this, but it seems reasonable to have.)
3. Resolved: A fix has been merged to master.
4. Closed: The fix has been verified by the reporter.
5. Reopened: The “fix" doesn’t actually fix the reporter’s problem.
The problem is that the “Resolved” and “Closed” statuses aren’t really distinguished on the site itself—it’s unclear for a contributor which one they’re supposed to use when they get something merged, and it’s unclear for the reporter what they’re supposed to say. Therefore, I suggest changing the “Resolved” status to “Verify” (like we use in Radar) and the “Resolve Issue” button to “Mark Resolved”.
(There are other things unspecified here, such as how to track what release a fix gets into, or what the story is for the Assignee field, but we can discuss those later.)
What do you think?
Thanks,
Jordan
_______________________________________________
swift-build-dev mailing list
swift-build-dev@swift.org <mailto:swift-build-dev@swift.org> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-build-dev
I think we can have a Verify state (per Jordan’s suggestion), and then have a script go over old tickets in Verify for a while and move them to Close.
···
On Aug 15, 2016, at 10:15 AM, Jordan Rose via swift-corelibs-dev <swift-corelibs-dev@swift.org> wrote:
It hasn’t been used so much so far, but on the bugs where it has I like being able to tell the difference. I don’t think we’d poke people about verification like we do with Radar, though, so we will (and have) end up with a lot of bugs left in Resolved/Verify.
Jordan
On Aug 15, 2016, at 10:10, Daniel Dunbar <daniel_dunbar@apple.com <mailto:daniel_dunbar@apple.com>> wrote:
Do we anticipate Verify being used in practice much?
Would it be better to simplify the workflow and just have a single "Resolved/Closed/Done" state? If the originator does test the bug and find it isn't fixed, they can reopen.
My guess is not that many people are going to actively look at their JIRA account to find bugs that they are supposed to be verifying.
- Daniel
On Aug 15, 2016, at 10:08 AM, Jordan Rose via swift-build-dev <swift-build-dev@swift.org <mailto:swift-build-dev@swift.org>> wrote:
Hi, swift-dev et al (but especially Ted). I’ve recently noticed that our JIRA workflow has been a bit confusing. We currently have five “statuses":
1. Opened: This bug has been filed.
2. In Progress: Someone is actively working on this bug. (Not everyone has been bothering to set this, but it seems reasonable to have.)
3. Resolved: A fix has been merged to master.
4. Closed: The fix has been verified by the reporter.
5. Reopened: The “fix" doesn’t actually fix the reporter’s problem.
The problem is that the “Resolved” and “Closed” statuses aren’t really distinguished on the site itself—it’s unclear for a contributor which one they’re supposed to use when they get something merged, and it’s unclear for the reporter what they’re supposed to say. Therefore, I suggest changing the “Resolved” status to “Verify” (like we use in Radar) and the “Resolve Issue” button to “Mark Resolved”.
(There are other things unspecified here, such as how to track what release a fix gets into, or what the story is for the Assignee field, but we can discuss those later.)
What do you think?
Thanks,
Jordan
_______________________________________________
swift-build-dev mailing list
swift-build-dev@swift.org <mailto:swift-build-dev@swift.org> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-build-dev