OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [office] JIRA Work Flow Proposal, was Re: [office] All done


This sounds good.  I'd suggest two other possibilities:

1) We probably need a way to suggest that a particular item requires 
discussion by the TC, because it is a large change or controversial.  JIRA 
doesn't have  a workflow state that corresponds to this.  So, I think we 
need to rely on TC members (including Patrick) to nominate items for TC 
meeting agendas, that they think require additional discussion.  Maybe 
they also add a comment to the JIRA issue, something we can search for 
like "Hold for Discussion".  This would indicate that we do not trigger 
the "Apply" state change until discussed.  Of course, the vast majority of 
issues are editorial or minor and will require no in depth discussion, and 
would make it into the proposed CD for review and approval at that time.

2) It is possible that some of the editor notes are found to be invalid, 
or should be deferred for the next version of ODF.  So it is possible that 
some comments might not go to the create->open->resolve->apply->close 
states, but might go directly create->close, or create->assign to 
ODF-Next.  These will probably be rare.

-Rob

Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM wrote on 05/29/2009 07:47:11 AM:
> 
> [office] JIRA Work Flow Proposal, was Re: [office] All done
> 
> Sent by:
> 
> Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM
> 
> To get an understanding what the work flow in JIRA for these issues
> could be now, I've started to add the comments and proposed resolution
> that I have forwarded as documents previously to the items. I have
> entered the proposed resolutions into the "proposal" field. To be able
> to differ between those item where we have a proposed resolution and
> those where we have none, I've set the status of those items where we
> have a proposed resolution to "Resolved". This is the 3rd status in the
> chain "New" -> "Open" -> "Resolved" -> "Applied" -> "Closed".
> 
> My proposal how we proceed is:
> 
> Whoever has time and and interest may comment on an item, and may
> provide a resolution. This resolution is recorded in the "proposal"
> field. If a proposal for a resolution does exist, the proposer of the
> resolution sets the status of the issue to "resolved".
> 
> Patrick (or myself if an issue affects the schema) takes the issues
> whose status is "resolved" and applies the proposed resolution to the
> specification text. He then sets the status to "Applied".
> 
> The changes to the specification still will be recorded. We continue to
> have a week for TC internal reviews of drafts before we vote on them in
> a TC meeting, or we conduct electronic ballots for committee drafts, 
> that run at least a week anyway, so that there is the same time 
> available for a review.
> 
> TC members therefore have the choice to either watch the items in JIRA,
> or to just review the changes in the next draft. The approval of a
> resolution takes place with the approval of a committee draft. This
> means that nothing that we do in JIRA implies any kind of approval by
> the TC, and that it is not required to watch the changes in JIRA to
> figure out what changes are made in a draft.
> 
> When a draft has been approved as committee draft, all issues applied to
> that draft are closed (unless someone has objected to a particular
> resolution).
> 
> I have created two new filters:
> 
> "Open 1.2 Editorial Notes" lists those items whose title starts with
> "Editorial Notes" and that are open. This filter may be used to find all
> issues for which no resolution does exist yet.
> 
> "Resolved, unapplied 1.2 Editorial Notes" lists those items for which a
> resolution has been proposed, and whose status is "resolved". This
> filter is useful if you want to review proposed resolution, but also
> useful for Patrick to find the items that may be ready to be applied to 
> the specification.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Michael
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 05/28/09 20:05, robert_weir@us.ibm.com wrote:
> > You probably want to delete all of those 260+ notifications from JIRA. 

> > These was a one-time port of Patrick's remaining editor notes. They've 

> > been entered, opened, and assigned to Patrick.  This will make it 
easier 
> > to track these items going forward.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > -Rob
> > 
> > 
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> > generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php 

> > 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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: Thomas Schroeder, Wolfgang Engels, Wolf Frenkel
> Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Haering
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php 
> 



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]