+1 from this useful proposal.

This makes me clearer about "Resolve" and "Close" since I used to be
confused by this two button.

Best,
Yang

Jingsong Li <jingsongl...@gmail.com> 于2020年5月25日周一 下午3:10写道:

> +1 for the proposal.
> It makes me clearer.
>
> Best,
> Jingsong Lee
>
> On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 2:51 PM Zhijiang <wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com
> .invalid>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for launching this discussion and giving so detailed infos,
> > Robert!  +1 on my side for the proposal.
> >
> > For "Affects Version", I previously thought it was only for the already
> > released versions, so it can give a reminder that the fix should also
> pick
> > into the related released branches for future minor versions.
> > I saw that Jark had somehow similar concerns for this field in below
> > replies.  Either way makes sense for me as long as we give a determined
> > rule in Wiki.
> >
> > Re Flavio' s comments, I agree that the Jira reporter can leave most of
> > the fields empty if not confirmed of them, then the respective component
> > maintainer or committer can update them accordingly later.
> > But the state of Jira should not be marked as "resolved" when the PR is
> > detected, that is not fitting into the resolved semantic I guess. If
> > possible, the Jira can be updated as "in progress" automatically if
> > the respective PR is ready, then it will save some time to stat progress
> > of related issues during release process.
> >
> > Best,
> > Zhijiang
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > From:Congxian Qiu <qcx978132...@gmail.com>
> > Send Time:2020年5月25日(星期一) 13:57
> > To:dev@flink.apache.org <dev@flink.apache.org>
> > Subject:Re: [DISCUSS] Semantics of our JIRA fields
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > Currently, when I'm going to create an issue for Project-website. I'm not
> > very sure what the "Affect Version/s" should be set. The problem is that
> > the current Dockfile[1] in flink-web is broken because of the EOL of
> Ubuntu
> > 18.10[2], the project-web does not affect any release of Flink, it does
> > affect the process to build website, so what's the version should I set
> to?
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/flink-web/blob/bc66f0f0f463ab62a22e81df7d7efd301b76a6b4/docker/Dockerfile#L17
> > [2] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases
> >
> > Best,
> > Congxian
> >
> >
> > Flavio Pompermaier <pomperma...@okkam.it> 于2020年5月24日周日 下午1:23写道:
> >
> > > In my experience it's quite complicated for a normal reporter to be
> able
> > to
> > > fill all the fields correctly (especially for new users).
> > > Usually you just wanto to report a problem, remember to add a new
> feature
> > > or improve code/documentation but you can't really give a priority,
> > assign
> > > the correct label or decide which releases will benefit of the fix/new
> > > feature. This is something that only core developers could decide
> (IMHO).
> > >
> > > My experiece says that it's better if normal users could just open
> > tickets
> > > with some default (or mark ticket as new) and leave them in such a
> state
> > > until an experienced user, one that can assign tickets, have the time
> to
> > > read it and immediately reject the ticket or accept it and properly
> > assign
> > > priorities, fix version, etc.
> > >
> > > With respect to resolve/close I think that a good practice could be to
> > mark
> > > automatically a ticket as resolved once that a PR is detected for that
> > > ticket, while marking it as closed should be done by the commiter who
> > merge
> > > the PR.
> > >
> > > Probably this process would slightly increase the work of a committer
> but
> > > this would make things a lot cleaner and will bring the benefit of
> > having a
> > > reliable and semantically sound JIRA state.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Flavio
> > >
> > > Il Dom 24 Mag 2020, 05:05 Israel Ekpo <israele...@gmail.com> ha
> scritto:
> > >
> > > > +1 for the proposal
> > > >
> > > > This will bring some consistency to the process
> > > >
> > > > Regarding Closed vs Resolved, should we go back and switch all the
> > > Resolved
> > > > issues to Closed so that is is not confusing to new people to the
> > project
> > > > in the future that may not have seen this discussion?
> > > >
> > > > I would recommend changing it to Closed just to be consistent since
> > that
> > > is
> > > > the majority and the new process will be using Closed going forward
> > > >
> > > > Those are my thoughts for now
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 7:48 AM Congxian Qiu <qcx978132...@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 for the proposal. It's good to have a unified description and
> > write
> > > it
> > > > > down in the wiki, so that every contributor has the same
> > understanding
> > > of
> > > > > all the fields.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Congxian
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> 于2020年5月23日周六 上午12:04写道:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for drafting this proposal Robert. +1 for the proposal.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > Till
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 5:39 PM Leonard Xu <xbjt...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks bringing up this topic @Robert,  +1 to the proposal.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It clarifies the JIRA fields well and should be a rule to
> follow.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > Leonard Xu
> > > > > > > > 在 2020年5月22日,20:24,Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>
> 写道:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > +1 That's also how I think of the semantics of the fields.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Aljoscha
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 22.05.20 08:07, Robert Metzger wrote:
> > > > > > > >> Hi all,
> > > > > > > >> I have the feeling that the semantics of some of our JIRA
> > fields
> > > > > > (mostly
> > > > > > > >> "affects versions", "fix versions" and resolve / close) are
> > not
> > > > > > defined
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > >> the same way by all the core Flink contributors, which leads
> > to
> > > > > cases
> > > > > > > where
> > > > > > > >> I spend quite some time on filling the fields correctly (at
> > > least
> > > > > > what I
> > > > > > > >> consider correctly), and then others changing them again to
> > > match
> > > > > > their
> > > > > > > >> semantics.
> > > > > > > >> In an effort to increase our efficiency, and since I'm
> > creating
> > > a
> > > > > lot
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > >> (test instability-related) tickets these days, I would like
> to
> > > > > discuss
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> semantics, come to a conclusion and document this in our
> Wiki.
> > > > > > > >> *Proposal:*
> > > > > > > >> *Priority:*
> > > > > > > >> "Blocker": needs to be resolved before a release (matched
> > based
> > > on
> > > > > fix
> > > > > > > >> versions)
> > > > > > > >> "Critical": strongly considered before a release
> > > > > > > >> other priorities have no practical meaning in Flink.
> > > > > > > >> *Component/s:*
> > > > > > > >> Primary component relevant for this feature / fix.
> > > > > > > >> For test-related issues, add the component the test belongs
> to
> > > > (for
> > > > > > > example
> > > > > > > >> "Connectors / Kafka" for Kafka test failures) + "Test".
> > > > > > > >> The same applies for documentation tickets. For example, if
> > > > there's
> > > > > > > >> something wrong with the DataStream API, add it to the "API
> /
> > > > > > > DataStream"
> > > > > > > >> and "Documentation" components.
> > > > > > > >> *Affects Version/s:*Only for Bug / Task-type tickets: We
> list
> > > all
> > > > > > > currently
> > > > > > > >> supported and unreleased Flink versions known to be affected
> > by
> > > > > this.
> > > > > > > >> Example: If I see a test failure that happens on "master"
> and
> > > > > > > >> "release-1.11", I set "affects version" to "1.12.0" and
> > > "1.11.0".
> > > > > > > >> *Fix Version/s:*
> > > > > > > >> For closed/resolved tickets, this field lists the released
> > Flink
> > > > > > > versions
> > > > > > > >> that contain a fix or feature for the first time.
> > > > > > > >> For open tickets, it indicates that a fix / feature should
> be
> > > > > > contained
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > >> the listed versions. Only blocker issues can block a
> release,
> > > all
> > > > > > other
> > > > > > > >> tickets which have "fix version/s" set at the time of a
> > release
> > > > and
> > > > > > are
> > > > > > > >> unresolved will be moved to the next version.
> > > > > > > >> *Assignee:*
> > > > > > > >> Person currently working on the ticket. Assigned after
> > > conclusion
> > > > on
> > > > > > > >> approach by a committer.
> > > > > > > >> Often, fixes are obvious and committers self-assign w/o
> > > > discussion.
> > > > > > > >> *Resolve / Close:*
> > > > > > > >> You can either Resolve or Close a ticket once it is done
> > (fixed,
> > > > > > > rejected,
> > > > > > > >> invalid, ...).
> > > > > > > >> As a rule, we Close tickets instead of Resolving them when
> > they
> > > > are
> > > > > > > done.
> > > > > > > >> Background: There are semantic differences for Resolve and
> > Close
> > > > > > > >> (implementor vs reporter considers it done), but I don't see
> > how
> > > > > they
> > > > > > > >> practically apply to the Flink project. Looking at the
> > numbers,
> > > > > Flink
> > > > > > > has
> > > > > > > >> 11066 closed tickets, and 3372 resolved tickets (that's why
> I
> > > > > propose
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > >> close instead of resolve)
> > > > > > > >> *Labels:*
> > > > > > > >> "test-stability" for all test instabilities
> > > > > > > >> "starter" for tickets suitable for new contributors
> > > > > > > >> *Release Note:*
> > > > > > > >> Small notes that will be included into the release notes
> > > published
> > > > > > with
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> release.
> > > > > > > >> *All other fields are not used not used on a regular basis.*
> > > > > > > >> Please +1 my proposal if you want it to be published in our
> > Wiki
> > > > > like
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > >> or let me know if I got something wrong here.
> > > > > > > >> Best,
> > > > > > > >> Robert
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Best, Jingsong Lee
>

Reply via email to