Hi Robert, Could you elaborate on your comment on test instabilities? Would test instabilities always get a fixVersion then?
Background: Test instabilities are supposed to be Critical. Critical tickets are deprioritized if they are unassigned and have not received an update for 14 days. Cheers, Konstantin On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 9:34 AM Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> wrote: > +1 > This would also cover test instabilities, which I personally believe should > not be auto-deprioritized until they've been analyzed. > > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 1:46 PM Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > I like this idea. +1 for your proposal Konstantin. > > > > Cheers, > > Till > > > > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 1:30 PM Konstantin Knauf < > konstan...@ververica.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > Till and I recently discussed whether we should disable the > > > "stale-blocker", "stale-critical", "stale-major" and "stale-minor" > rules > > > for tickets that have a fixVersion set. This would allow people to plan > > the > > > upcoming release without tickets being deprioritized by the bot during > > the > > > release cycle. > > > > > > From my point of view, this is a good idea as long as we can agree to > use > > > the "fixVersion" a bit more conservatively. What do I mean by that? If > > you > > > would categorize tickets planned for an upcoming release into: > > > > > > * Must Have > > > * Should Have > > > * Nice-To-Have > > > > > > only "Must Have" and "Should Have" tickets should get a fixVersion. > From > > my > > > observation, we currently often set the fixVersion if we just wished a > > > feature was included in an upcoming release. Similarly, I often see > bulk > > > changes of fixVersion that "roll over" many tickets to the next release > > if > > > they have not made into the previous release although there is no > > concrete > > > plan to fix them or they have even become obsolete by then. Excluding > > those > > > from the bot would be counterproductive. > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Konstantin > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 2:25 PM Konstantin Knauf <kna...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > After some offline conversations, I think, it makes sense to already > > open > > > > this thread now in order to collect feedback and suggestions around > the > > > > Jira Bot. > > > > > > > > The following two changes I will do right away: > > > > > > > > * increase "stale-assigned.stale-days" to 14 days (Marta, Stephan, > Nico > > > > have provided feedback that this is too aggressive). > > > > > > > > * exclude Sub-Tasks from all rules except the "stale-assigned" rule > (I > > > > think, this was just an oversight in the original discussion.) > > > > > > > > Keep it coming. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > Konstantin > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Konstantin Knauf > > > > > > > > https://twitter.com/snntrable > > > > > > > > https://github.com/knaufk > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Konstantin Knauf | Head of Product > > > > > > +49 160 91394525 > > > > > > > > > Follow us @VervericaData Ververica <https://www.ververica.com/> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Join Flink Forward <https://flink-forward.org/> - The Apache Flink > > > Conference > > > > > > Stream Processing | Event Driven | Real Time > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Ververica GmbH | Invalidenstrasse 115, 10115 Berlin, Germany > > > > > > -- > > > Ververica GmbH > > > Registered at Amtsgericht Charlottenburg: HRB 158244 B > > > Managing Directors: Yip Park Tung Jason, Jinwei (Kevin) Zhang, Karl > Anton > > > Wehner > > > > > > -- Konstantin Knauf https://twitter.com/snntrable https://github.com/knaufk
