[etoys-dev] jira re-arrangement
timothy at squeakland.org
Mon Aug 31 09:46:34 EDT 2009
On Aug 24, 2009, at 6:30 PM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> On 24.08.2009, at 23:56, Timothy Falconer wrote:
>>> Hmm, putting the change to the update stream is so far limited to
>>> certain users. (And "works for me" just by somebody often is not
>>> right reason to "Close" an item.)
>> I think my initial process page said that software team members
>> verify and push to the stream (#13):
> you meant #14?
>> Priorities and code review are the primary function of the software
> We should clarify how to "submit code" in step #12.
> Also, when resolving in step 12, I guess the resolution should be
> "ongoing"? The options are Complete, Reject, Duplicate, Unclear,
> Cannot Reproduce, Ongoing, Test Passed, Test Failed. So "ongoing"
> would mean "ready for testing"?
When you click "resolve", the word "complete" means, "my work is
complete". With small groups, we simply re-open the issue when
someone's test doesn't pass. (I never use "test passed" and "test
> And in step 14, how do we mark a closed issue that is not yet put to
> the update stream"? Or should rather the tester change the
> resolution to "test passed", and the developer who pushes an update
> to the stream closes the issue?
Issues should be closed by someone on the software team at the same
time as pushing the changeset. I've modified the process page to make
> As for the other resolutions, who is going to close these issues,
> and when?
> - Bert -
> etoys-dev mailing list
> etoys-dev at squeakland.org
More information about the etoys-dev