| Hi, Eike,
I agree. I would be happiest if Bugzilla had separate "Target Version" and "Target Milestone" fields, but alas, it does not. Of course, in that case, a "Ganymede x.y.2" target would be a target version, and not a milestone, but that would be fine.
I thought that the problem was in the proliferation of version *numbers* in the target milestones, so that we had, for example, 2.4.1/1.2.1/1.0.1 all referring to the same maintenance release of different EMF components, where a single "Ganymede x.y.1" would suffice for the lot.
However, now I am stuck with a bunch of bugs that were targeted for maintenance releases and are now targeted to "Past," and I have no sensible alternative in the current list of milestones. I just want to get back to conveying the same information in my bugs as they did last week.
"Ganymede x.y.1" etc. is not a great solution, but it fits the current database schema and it would actually work.
If anyone has a cleaner solution, please let me know!
Thanks,
Christian On 24-Nov-08, at 2:04 PM, Eike Stepper wrote: Christian, I always thought a clean solution would include separate target versions and generic target milestones. But I believe that this would require a broader discussion, if possible at all... Cheers /Eike ---- http://thegordian.blogspot.com Christian W. Damus schrieb: Hi, all,
I have a follow-up problem on the subject of target milestones.
I see that we have SR1 and SR2 milestones, now, which I suppose are meant for the targeting of bugs into the maintenance releases. However, this raises some questions:
- how do I indicate which release stream (Europa/Ganymede/Galileo) the maintenance fix is targeted at? It doesn't make sense to use the flags because they are for planning, and these fixes aren't planned. (besides, only Galileo has a flag)
- my components have maintenance releases that line up with the train SR1 and SR2, but also more releases in between. For example, I had a 1.2.1 release before 1.2.2 which corresponded with SR2. We could add, say, SR3 and SR4 milestones, but the "SR" terminology suggests a correspondence with the train timetable
Can we, perhaps, add generic milestones as follows, to solve both of these issues?
- Ganymede x.y.1
- Ganymede x.y.2
- Ganymede x.y.3
- Galileo x.y.1
- Galileo x.y.2
- Galileo x.y.3
I'm not sure that the SR1 and SR2 milestones will be useful. Perhaps they could then be deleted.
What do other EMF committers think of this?
Thanks,
Christian -- Christian W. Damus Senior Software Developer, Zeligsoft Inc. Component Lead, Eclipse MDT OCL and EMF-QTV
_______________________________________________
emf-dev mailing list
emf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/emf-dev
emf-dev mailing list
emf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/emf-dev
-- Christian W. Damus Senior Software Developer, Zeligsoft Inc. Component Lead, Eclipse MDT OCL and EMF-QTV
|
