Quantcast

[vote]Re: Should DERBY take advantage of infra's offer of some svn/JIRA integration

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

[vote]Re: Should DERBY take advantage of infra's offer of some svn/JIRA integration

Myrna van Lunteren
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 5:24 AM, Rick Hillegas <[hidden email]> wrote:
I agree with Knut that this is a procedural issue which could be handled by a lazy consensus vote: http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html . Although we've been discussing the topic for a couple days, we haven't done so under the aegis of a formal vote. Thanks to Myrna for offering to call the lazy consensus vote and then file the INFRA issue afterward. The vote will only add 72 hours of delay to the process.

Thanks,
-Rick


It's not actually clear to me whether for a lazy consensus vote on a procedural issue, you should include 'vote' in the subject, but I did - I now officially state that if no one objects within 3 days, I'll go ahead and log a JIRA issue for INFRA to implement the svn/jira changes described on http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html.

Note that this will only apply to commits going forward. Mike did ask infra about going backwards, and they came back with the following:
"Someone should be able to whip up a script to
retroactively update jiras with commit information by adding comments...

I don't think infra needs to be involved in this, even, except perhaps
if the script author will accidentally get himself banned for abuse."

So if someone wants to figure out how to make such a script please volunteer, for now this will only affect commits going forward.

Myrna

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [vote]Re: Should DERBY take advantage of infra's offer of some svn/JIRA integration

Rick Hillegas
On 5/30/13 9:23 AM, Myrna van Lunteren wrote:

> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 5:24 AM, Rick Hillegas
> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     I agree with Knut that this is a procedural issue which could be
>     handled by a lazy consensus vote:
>     http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html . Although we've been
>     discussing the topic for a couple days, we haven't done so under
>     the aegis of a formal vote. Thanks to Myrna for offering to call
>     the lazy consensus vote and then file the INFRA issue afterward.
>     The vote will only add 72 hours of delay to the process.
>
>     Thanks,
>     -Rick
>
>
> It's not actually clear to me whether for a lazy consensus vote on a
> procedural issue, you should include 'vote' in the subject, but I did
> - I now officially state that if no one objects within 3 days, I'll go
> ahead and log a JIRA issue for INFRA to implement the svn/jira changes
> described on http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html.
>
> Note that this will only apply to commits going forward. Mike did ask
> infra about going backwards, and they came back with the following:
> "Someone should be able to whip up a script to
> retroactively update jiras with commit information by adding comments...
>
> I don't think infra needs to be involved in this, even, except perhaps
> if the script author will accidentally get himself banned for abuse."
>
> So if someone wants to figure out how to make such a script please
> volunteer, for now this will only affect commits going forward.
>
> Myrna
>
+1
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [vote]Re: Should DERBY take advantage of infra's offer of some svn/JIRA integration

mikem_app
In reply to this post by Myrna van Lunteren
On 5/30/2013 9:23 AM, Myrna van Lunteren wrote:

> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 5:24 AM, Rick Hillegas <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     I agree with Knut that this is a procedural issue which could be
>     handled by a lazy consensus vote:
>     http://www.apache.org/__foundation/voting.html
>     <http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html> . Although we've been
>     discussing the topic for a couple days, we haven't done so under the
>     aegis of a formal vote. Thanks to Myrna for offering to call the
>     lazy consensus vote and then file the INFRA issue afterward. The
>     vote will only add 72 hours of delay to the process.
>
>     Thanks,
>     -Rick
>
>
> It's not actually clear to me whether for a lazy consensus vote on a
> procedural issue, you should include 'vote' in the subject, but I did -
> I now officially state that if no one objects within 3 days, I'll go
> ahead and log a JIRA issue for INFRA to implement the svn/jira changes
> described on http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html.
>
> Note that this will only apply to commits going forward. Mike did ask
> infra about going backwards, and they came back with the following:
> "Someone should be able to whip up a script to
> retroactively update jiras with commit information by adding comments...
>
> I don't think infra needs to be involved in this, even, except perhaps
> if the script author will accidentally get himself banned for abuse."
>
> So if someone wants to figure out how to make such a script please
> volunteer, for now this will only affect commits going forward.
>
> Myrna
>
+1
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [vote]Re: Should DERBY take advantage of infra's offer of some svn/JIRA integration

Dag H. Wanvik-2
+1

Thanks,
Dag

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [vote]Re: Should DERBY take advantage of infra's offer of some svn/JIRA integration

Kim Haase-2
In reply to this post by Myrna van Lunteren
+1

On 5/30/2013 12:23 PM, Myrna van Lunteren wrote:

> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 5:24 AM, Rick Hillegas <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     I agree with Knut that this is a procedural issue which could be
>     handled by a lazy consensus vote:
>     http://www.apache.org/__foundation/voting.html
>     <http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html> . Although we've been
>     discussing the topic for a couple days, we haven't done so under the
>     aegis of a formal vote. Thanks to Myrna for offering to call the
>     lazy consensus vote and then file the INFRA issue afterward. The
>     vote will only add 72 hours of delay to the process.
>
>     Thanks,
>     -Rick
>
>
> It's not actually clear to me whether for a lazy consensus vote on a
> procedural issue, you should include 'vote' in the subject, but I did -
> I now officially state that if no one objects within 3 days, I'll go
> ahead and log a JIRA issue for INFRA to implement the svn/jira changes
> described on http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html.
>
> Note that this will only apply to commits going forward. Mike did ask
> infra about going backwards, and they came back with the following:
> "Someone should be able to whip up a script to
> retroactively update jiras with commit information by adding comments...
>
> I don't think infra needs to be involved in this, even, except perhaps
> if the script author will accidentally get himself banned for abuse."
>
> So if someone wants to figure out how to make such a script please
> volunteer, for now this will only affect commits going forward.
>
> Myrna
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [vote]Re: Should DERBY take advantage of infra's offer of some svn/JIRA integration

Katherine Marsden-2
In reply to this post by Dag H. Wanvik-2
+1

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [vote]Re: Should DERBY take advantage of infra's offer of some svn/JIRA integration

Lily Wei-2
In reply to this post by Rick Hillegas
+1

Thanks,
Lily

On May 30, 2013, at 12:49 PM, Rick Hillegas <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 5/30/13 9:23 AM, Myrna van Lunteren wrote:
>> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 5:24 AM, Rick Hillegas <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>
>>    I agree with Knut that this is a procedural issue which could be
>>    handled by a lazy consensus vote:
>>    http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html . Although we've been
>>    discussing the topic for a couple days, we haven't done so under
>>    the aegis of a formal vote. Thanks to Myrna for offering to call
>>    the lazy consensus vote and then file the INFRA issue afterward.
>>    The vote will only add 72 hours of delay to the process.
>>
>>    Thanks,
>>    -Rick
>>
>>
>> It's not actually clear to me whether for a lazy consensus vote on a procedural issue, you should include 'vote' in the subject, but I did - I now officially state that if no one objects within 3 days, I'll go ahead and log a JIRA issue for INFRA to implement the svn/jira changes described on http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html.
>>
>> Note that this will only apply to commits going forward. Mike did ask infra about going backwards, and they came back with the following:
>> "Someone should be able to whip up a script to
>> retroactively update jiras with commit information by adding comments...
>>
>> I don't think infra needs to be involved in this, even, except perhaps
>> if the script author will accidentally get himself banned for abuse."
>>
>> So if someone wants to figure out how to make such a script please volunteer, for now this will only affect commits going forward.
>>
>> Myrna
> +1
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [vote]Re: Should DERBY take advantage of infra's offer of some svn/JIRA integration

Myrna van Lunteren

Thanks everyone, there were 6 +1 votes and no nays.
I've logged an infra issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-6346.

Myrna


On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Lily Wei <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1

Thanks,
Lily

On May 30, 2013, at 12:49 PM, Rick Hillegas <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 5/30/13 9:23 AM, Myrna van Lunteren wrote:
>> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 5:24 AM, Rick Hillegas <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>
>>    I agree with Knut that this is a procedural issue which could be
>>    handled by a lazy consensus vote:
>>    http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html . Although we've been
>>    discussing the topic for a couple days, we haven't done so under
>>    the aegis of a formal vote. Thanks to Myrna for offering to call
>>    the lazy consensus vote and then file the INFRA issue afterward.
>>    The vote will only add 72 hours of delay to the process.
>>
>>    Thanks,
>>    -Rick
>>
>>
>> It's not actually clear to me whether for a lazy consensus vote on a procedural issue, you should include 'vote' in the subject, but I did - I now officially state that if no one objects within 3 days, I'll go ahead and log a JIRA issue for INFRA to implement the svn/jira changes described on http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html.
>>
>> Note that this will only apply to commits going forward. Mike did ask infra about going backwards, and they came back with the following:
>> "Someone should be able to whip up a script to
>> retroactively update jiras with commit information by adding comments...
>>
>> I don't think infra needs to be involved in this, even, except perhaps
>> if the script author will accidentally get himself banned for abuse."
>>
>> So if someone wants to figure out how to make such a script please volunteer, for now this will only affect commits going forward.
>>
>> Myrna
> +1

Loading...