Grokbase Groups Lucene dev April 2016
FAQ
: The biggest problem seems to be that bulk edit to set the version number
: overrides any *additional* version numbers in those issues (they'd get
: removed). Assuming we can set multiple versions in bulk-edit, maybe we
: only need to do this command once for every 5.x release? -- i.e. find all
: issues with fix version master & 5.2, then replace it with 6.0 & 5.2. Or
: just replace with 5.2 for that matter -- code in 5.x is assumed to be in
: all versions after (whatever "master" is). When I close issues, I don't

that doesn't really help for things that currently say "Fix Version: 5.3,
5.2.2, master" ... if you are running 5.2.0, it's important to know that
if you aren't ready to upgrade to 6.0, but you need a fix to that bug, you
can upgrade to either 5.3 or 5.2.2 -- but it wasn't fixed in 5.2.1.

So just doing one bulk edit for every "5.x, master" pair isn't enough ...
you can't even do *one* bulk edit for every 5.x.y, you'd have to do one
bulk edit for every permutation of all possible 5.x.y combos ... Example:
some bugs are "Fix Version: 5.3.2, 5.5, master, 5.4.1" while other bugs
are "5.3.2, 5.4, master" (depending on when they were fixed/backported)
...

...all in all this would probably be 10x more tedious then just abandoming
"master" and manually editing every issue in CHANGES.txt -- which in
itself would already be more tedious then my current favorite idea of
doing a jira "merge versions" and manually auditing the ~100 issues that
already have master+6.1 ... which is probably as tedious as i'm willing to
volunteer to be at this point (if other people wnat to volutneer for
something more tedious i'm happy to let them)


: On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:11 PM Chris Hostetter <hossman_lucene@fucit.org>
: wrote:
:
: >
: > : Is it possible there are 2100 of these?
: >
: > Possible or not, that's certialy what it looks like (1665 more in LUCENE)
: >
: > I woke up this morning thinking "Oh wait - doesn't jira have a way to
: > merge Versions?" ... and the answer is "Yes" so i was going to suggest the
: > following...
: >
: > for both the LUCENE and SOLR project...
: >
: > 1) Audit the list of Jira's with 'fixVersion=mater AND fixVersion=6.1' and
: > manually remove master from all of them (only ~100 total)
: > 2) merge "master" into "6.0"
: > 3) re add a "master" version to Jira
: > 3) Audit CHANGES.txt and set fixVersion=master on the handful of issues in
: > the 7.0 section
: >
: > ...but that was before i really looked at Cassandra's Jira queries...
: >
: > : I did the below JIRA query, only in the Solr project, looking for
: > : Resolved or Closed issues with fixVersion of "master", but not with
: > : fixVersion of 6.0 nor 6.1, resolved before 8 Apr 2016 (the release
: > : date of Lucene/Solr 6).
: > :
: > :
: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-7712?jql=project%20%3D%20SOLR%20AND%20status%20in%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20master%20AND%20fixVersion%20!%3D%206.0%20AND%20fixVersion%20!%3D%206.1%20AND%20resolved%20%3C%20%222016%2F04%2F08%22
: >
: > ...if you sort by Resolved Date, it becomes really clear that we've fucked
: > up on renaming/dealing with "master" for longer then just the 6.0 release
: > ... it seems like s we didn't do something correctly for 5.0 either.
: >
: > So i'm kind of at a loss now as to what the optimal solution would be.
: >
: > : It seems it would be easier to make some sort of "rename master" sort
: > : of change and go back and fix the ones that shouldn't be changed
: > : because they have been finished post-6.0 release, but I'm not seeing a
: > : good way to make a single query for those.
: >
: > that kind of fits with my "Merge Version" idea ... but i'm not sure if/how
: > to care about the really old issues 4.x which will start saying "Fixed in:
: > ...,6.0" ... will that confuse people? Will users see "Fixed in:
: > 4.0-ALPHA, 6.0" and think there was a regression in 5.x? ... or am i just
: > over thinking things?
: >
: >
: >
: > The other option: straight up delete "master" so it disappears from all of
: > these issues (we can add a new "master" back later) and then explicitly
: > add 6.0 to every issue mentioned in the 6.0 CHANGES sections ... writting a
: > little perl script to pull them out and build up a few jira search urls
: > like "id in (SOLR-3085, SOLR-7560, SOLR-7707, SOLR-7707, ...)" wouldn't be
: > too painful, and once we had those search URLs matches a few hundred
: > issues each, we can use the "Bulk Edit" to add 6.0...
: >
: > ...oh fuck ... right, i forgot about this part...
: >
: > : Additionally, and sadly, in JIRA any bulk update to a field overwrites
: > : the existing value in the field. So if the fixVersion is "master" and
: > : "5.3", then doing a bulk update to "master" only would remove "5.3".
: >
: >
: > ...so i guess i'm back to my "Merge master -> 6.0" idea, and oh well to
: > any confusion there might be for those really old issues.
: >
: >
: > Anybody have a better suggestion?
: >
: >
: >
: > -Hoss
: > http://www.lucidworks.com/
: >
: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
: > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
: > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
: >
: > --
: Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
: LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
: http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
:

-Hoss
http://www.lucidworks.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts

Previous

Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 8 of 14 | next ›
Discussion Overview
groupdev @
categorieslucene
postedApr 13, '16 at 10:40p
activeMay 4, '16 at 2:19a
posts14
users5
websitelucene.apache.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2017 Grokbase