Hide
This came up in IRC, so I'm going to cut and paste the conversation, but basically the gist is: create a jira workflow that can be used by both committers and bug submitters to mark tickets as "patch submitted" and "patch applied" or "patch rejected".
[1:33pm] MrDys_lunch: that actually reminds me of something else that came up here re: small patches
[1:33pm] cbeer: ok
[1:34pm] MrDys_lunch: when a patch is submitted like that and there is a jira ticket
[1:34pm] MrDys_lunch: who closes the ticket? the person that applied the patch, submitted the patch, or created the ticket?
[1:35pm] bess: MrDys_lunch: dunno. I guess we better decide that. What do you think?
[1:36pm] cbeer: probably should be created the ticket, no?
[1:36pm] MrDys_lunch: I'm tending towards person that applied the patch because it could get rejected
[1:36pm] cbeer: just in case the person who applied it forgot something
[1:36pm] MrDys_lunch: but I think that implies that there's a more structured patch application process in place
[1:36pm] bess: do we need more of a structured process?
[1:37pm] bess: like a workflow where the person who submits a patch can mark the ticket "patch submitted"
[1:37pm] bess: and then one of the core folks can mark the ticket "patch rejected" or close it or somethign?
[1:37pm] MrDys_lunch: that seems like that will work
[1:37pm] MrDys_lunch: might make it easier for more people to start submitting things
[1:37pm] bess: MrDys_lunch: do you want to look into that? Are you our Jira master now?
[1:38pm] MrDys_lunch: and hopefully with the move to git, that will happen more frequently
[1:38pm] MrDys_lunch: bess: yeah, sure
[1:38pm] MrDys_lunch: I'm going to put it down on the agenda for the open call this week as well
Show
This came up in IRC, so I'm going to cut and paste the conversation, but basically the gist is: create a jira workflow that can be used by both committers and bug submitters to mark tickets as "patch submitted" and "patch applied" or "patch rejected".
[1:33pm] MrDys_lunch: that actually reminds me of something else that came up here re: small patches
[1:33pm] cbeer: ok
[1:34pm] MrDys_lunch: when a patch is submitted like that and there is a jira ticket
[1:34pm] MrDys_lunch: who closes the ticket? the person that applied the patch, submitted the patch, or created the ticket?
[1:35pm] bess: MrDys_lunch: dunno. I guess we better decide that. What do you think?
[1:36pm] cbeer: probably should be created the ticket, no?
[1:36pm] MrDys_lunch: I'm tending towards person that applied the patch because it could get rejected
[1:36pm] cbeer: just in case the person who applied it forgot something
[1:36pm] MrDys_lunch: but I think that implies that there's a more structured patch application process in place
[1:36pm] bess: do we need more of a structured process?
[1:37pm] bess: like a workflow where the person who submits a patch can mark the ticket "patch submitted"
[1:37pm] bess: and then one of the core folks can mark the ticket "patch rejected" or close it or somethign?
[1:37pm] MrDys_lunch: that seems like that will work
[1:37pm] MrDys_lunch: might make it easier for more people to start submitting things
[1:37pm] bess: MrDys_lunch: do you want to look into that? Are you our Jira master now?
[1:38pm] MrDys_lunch: and hopefully with the move to git, that will happen more frequently
[1:38pm] MrDys_lunch: bess: yeah, sure
[1:38pm] MrDys_lunch: I'm going to put it down on the agenda for the open call this week as well