[sakai2-tcc] Cleaning up versions in Jira

[David Horwitz]

Aha - I think we're in agreement but possibly talking cross purposes - 
that is exactly my reason for wanting to get rid of the .x non-versions :-)

D

On 07/06/2011 04:44 PM, Matthew Jones wrote:
> I mean on Jira, if you put in an affects version of 2.7.x it is 
> useless because it could be 2.7.x svn revision 69630 where there was a 
> problem or svn revision 93259. The branch itself like trunk is 
> meaningless without the revision number attached, but has meaning with 
> the revision, especially since we don't tag many releases. It's 
> possible if someone is on an older '.x' that it could be fixed in a 
> newer '.x'. At least for the tag, the revision is fixed.
>
> -Matthew
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:36 AM, David Horwitz 
> <david.horwitz at uct.ac.za <mailto:david.horwitz at uct.ac.za>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Matt,
>
>
>     On 07/06/2011 04:26 PM, Matthew Jones wrote:
>>     Where was this discussed at? While I'll agree the .x and trunk
>>     pretty alone useless as an affects or fixed, I can see both being
>>     useful if there was a version number attached to it.
>>
>
>     I raised this at the project planing meeting. What do you mean by
>     "if there was a version number attached to it". There is always
>     the the version for the next release of a branch (indicated by the
>     [Tentative]) and listed in Jira in the "Unreleased" heading.
>
>
>>     I think I'd still leave the latest 2.5 as a version, as people
>>     are still running that and people are still fixing it. However
>>     I'd *guess* that most are on 2.5.x, but that wouldn't be
>>     selectable right?
>>
>     2.5.7 and 2.5.x have been archived for some time - I'm not aware
>     of any branch merges that have been done since Steve Swinsberg did
>     the last official round. It seems to me that most schools that are
>     on 2.5 are working on migrating (based on what I've seen on list
>     but are could be wrong).
>
>
>     D
>
>
>
>>     On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:34 AM, David Horwitz
>>     <david.horwitz at uct.ac.za <mailto:david.horwitz at uct.ac.za>> wrote:
>>
>>         Hi All,
>>
>>         As discussed in LA we suggested getting rid of the x
>>         versions, so unless
>>         I hear otherwise I will archive the following versions:
>>
>>
>>
>>         - 2.6.x
>>         -2.7.x
>>         -2.8.x
>>
>>         Archiving means that issues that where tagged as affecting or
>>         fixed in
>>         those versions will still display this, however those
>>         versions will no
>>         longer appear in the dropdowns.
>>
>>         I would also suggest we archive the 2.5 versions:
>>         2.5.0
>>         2.5.1
>>         2.5.2
>>         2.5.3
>>         2.5.4
>>         2.5.5
>>         2.5.6
>>
>>
>>         Any objections?
>>
>>         Regards
>>
>>         David
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         sakai2-tcc mailing list
>>         sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
>>         <mailto:sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org>
>>         http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/sakai2-tcc/attachments/20110706/fc1090ef/attachment-0001.html