On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 7:43 PM, Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 6/3/11 7:27 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Simone Tripodi <simonetrip...@apache.org> >> wrote: >>>> I think that is also best practice - resolve when fixed in SVN, >>>> close when fix version is released. >>>> >>> I couldn't agree more!!! +1! >> I just close directly. The resolve then close is a workflow waiting >> for a reason :) > > The reason is that until a release has been cut including the fix, > it is still a problem faced by users. Just fixing in svn should not > close the issue.
Not a good enough reason imo. If 'Resolved' was called 'Committed' and 'Closed' was 'Released', then maybe. As it is we'll have a workflow that is meaningless to anyone but the committers; and they can already look at whether the fix version has been released or not. If Atlassian hadn't made the mistake of a 2 stage resolution as their default; we wouldn't be looking for a solution. As they did everyone (not just here, it's a JIRA anti-pattern) tries to apply a workflow to the Resolve/Close step. Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
