[WG: Sakai QA] [Building Sakai] 2x, JIRA use: When should maintenance branch should be in Fix Version/s?

[Anthony Whyte]

As Noah mentioned a version rollup was performed in Jira in order to combine all 2.7.0 milestone, alpha, beta, rc tickets into the final 2.7.0 release.  In my view it makes sense to associate explictly all the tickets addressed by the final release version (e.g. sakai-2.7.0), although it results in the loss of a bit of "visual" history (e.g., affects version = a specific pre-release tag such as sakai-2.7.0-b03) and results in the affects version = 2.70, fix version = 2.7.0.

One way to address this visual issue to adjust tickets with both an affects version = 2.7.0 and a fix version = 2.7.0 by changing the affects version to 2.7.x.  This is in no way distorts reality since sakai-2.7.0 was spawned from 2.7.x.  This change would not affect 2.7.0-related tickets created after the release of 2.7.0.

I've never been bothered by use of *.x as an affects version.  Indeed, there still remain schools who run maintenance branches in production--asking a reporter in such cases to figure out what release version corresponds with their production *.x instance is likely to result in errors as well as increase the time required to fill out the ticket.

As for the "fixed version" I'm of the opinion that only specific release version numbers should be employed.

If you think my proposal above makes sense, let me know and I will update the 2.7.0 rollup tickets.

Cheers,

Anth



On Jul 8, 2010, at 11:08 AM, Jean-Francois Leveque wrote:

> I suggest we do not reduce the affects to the latest, in order to avoid 
> loosing information. Bugs can appear on a .1 release and still be in a 
> .2 release without affecting a .0 release.
> 
> We cannot take for granted or not granted versions preceding 2.6.2 are 
> affected when setting 2.6.2 in affects. We should explicitly at least 
> add the versions we know are affected if they share the minor part like 
> 2.6.? when we're still maintaining the 2.6 branch.
> 
> I think we should not keep 2.7.0 in affects when the official 2.7.0 is 
> released and does not have the issue.
> 
> Noah Botimer a écrit :
>> It is important to have specific version numbers as much as possible. I 
>> think this applies even in the case where we are coming up on the end of 
>> the official support window for a maintenance branch -- marking a 
>> specific version that isn't released (yet or ever) indicates exactly 
>> where the fix is (on that branch, somewhere beyond the most recent release).
>> 
>> I guess I don't see the use of .x as a Fix version, ever, because it's 
>> not a version.
>> 
>> That ticket also shows a confusing pattern in Affects version:
>> 
>> *Affects Version/s:*	2.6.0, 2.6.1, 2.6.2, 2.7.0
>> *Fix Version/s:*	2.6.x 
>> <http://jira.sakaiproject.org/browse/SAK/fixforversion/11278>, 2.6.3 
>> <http://jira.sakaiproject.org/browse/SAK/fixforversion/11670>, 2.7.0 
>> <http://jira.sakaiproject.org/browse/SAK/fixforversion/11276>, 2.8.0 
>> [Tentative] <http://jira.sakaiproject.org/browse/SAK/fixforversion/11671>
>> 
>> 
>> My suggestion would be that Affects should be only 2.6.2 and 2.7.0. Fix 
>> should be 2.6.3 and 2.7.0. This tracks the latest places it happens and 
>> the first places it's fixed.
>> 
>> Note that this ticket is a little special in that it was fixed in the 
>> 2.7.0 ramp-down, which means that it was getting eyes during the QA 
>> period and was altered by the post-release roll-up of the beta/rc 
>> versions (into 2.7.0). During that QA period, it was affecting a beta 
>> tag and fixed for another, giving critical information to the QA work. 
>> This roll-up is where the somewhat awkward construction of 2.7.0 in both 
>> fields comes from.
>> 
>> For anything past .0, this should never be the case, and we might 
>> consider stripping 2.7.0 from Affects version where the Fix is 2.7.0 as 
>> part of the beta/rc roll-up. Affects 2.6.2 and Fixed in 2.6.3/2.7.0 is 
>> pretty clear to me as an implementor because it tells me exactly when 
>> I'd be affected and what I can do to get the fix.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> -Noah
>> 
>> On Jul 8, 2010, at 6:10 AM, Jean-Francois Leveque wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> I think we shouldn't put maintenance branch in fix version most of the
>>> time. We should set fix version to the next release we intend to tag
>>> from the maintenance branch.
>>> 
>>> I think we only should do this when we're not tagging releases from the
>>> maintenance branch anymore.
>>> 
>>> WDYT?
>>> 
>>> My apologies to Jonathan Cook for using
>>> http://jira.sakaiproject.org/browse/SAK-18094 as an example, if you need
>>> one. You input is welcome, Jonathan.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Jean-Francois
> _______________________________________________
> sakai-qa mailing list
> sakai-qa at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai-qa
> 
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to sakai-qa-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"
> 
>