Re: [office-formula] Handling of JIRA issues

[Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg <Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM>]

First of all, I do support Eike's proposal.

On 04/19/10 17:49, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> I think the problem is that the person who notices the issues might not know
> what the repair is.  It could be a serious defect, but available information
> in the specification is not enough to know what is intended or needed.

Yes, but Eike is not proposing that the submitter of the issue is
resolving it, but that someone in the SC commits to resolve it.
> 
> So we can be in a position where there is a known defect, it is clearly a
> defect, but no one steps forward to resolve it, or feels able to.  What
> then?

I don't think that will happen. If something is really clearly a defect, 
then there should be some understanding how to resolve the defect. 
That's because some knowledge what would be correct is required to judge 
that something is a defect. I further strongly believe we are all 
interested in a good specification. If a particular improvement is 
considered to be important not only by the submitter of the issue, then 
there should be someone who cares.

> 
> I suppose one resolution would be to remove whatever feature has the
> unresolved defect, but that might not always be a very welcome solution.  I
> guess we need to see what actually comes up before we decide to tie our
> hands in advance.

We other option is to keep a particular detail implementation dependent. 
That's not a perfect solution, but I think on many cases better than 
dropping a feature.

Michael
> 
>  - Dennis
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eike Rathke [mailto:erack@sun.com] 
> Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 08:16
> To: OASIS ODFF SC
> Subject: [office-formula] Handling of JIRA issues
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Since we're nearing CD3 and following that the hot phase of a public
> review, I'd like to propose a handling of JIRA issues until CD3 and
> review:
> 
> New and unassigned issues may not have a ODF 1.2 (CD3 or final) target
> set unless
> 
> a) Someone commits himself to resolve the issue for a specific target.
> 
> b) The TC/SC agrees on a target for the issue AND finds someone for a).
> 
> Following that, of course it is valid to submit an issue, regard it
> important enough for CD3, resolve it and target it to CD3.
> 
> However, it is invalid to submit new issues and target them to CD3 if no
> one committed on resolving the issue.
> 
> Otherwise having the target doesn't make sense.
> Opinions?
> 
>   Eike
> 


-- 
Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering
StarOffice/OpenOffice.org
Sun Microsystems GmbH             Nagelsweg 55
D-20097 Hamburg, Germany          michael.brauer@sun.com
http://sun.com/staroffice         +49 40 23646 500
http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1,
	   D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten
Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Jürgen Kunz