On 21/05/2015 17:46, Sage Weil wrote: > On Thu, 21 May 2015, Loic Dachary wrote: >> >> On 21/05/2015 14:41, Nathan Cutler wrote: >>>> * a backport issue is created in the "Backport" tracker and is >>>> "Related" to the original issue >>> >>> Hi Loic: >>> >>> I like the idea of having backport tickets in a separate Redmine >>> subproject/issue tracker. >> >> It would just be in a separate tracker, in the same project. >> >>> In fact, I would go even a step further and >>> have separate subprojects for each target version (hammer backports, >>> firefly backports). >> >> Separating them in a different project / subproject would create >> problems because redmine has ways to partition the subprojects that make >> some things difficult. For instance not all issues can be "Related" to >> issues in other projects which is kind of annoying. My general >> impression with redmine subprojects is that they tend to complexify and >> obscure the process rather than help. Or maybe it's just that my redmine >> skills are not what they should be. Do you have a different experience ? > > I agree. Adding subprojects clutters up the project list, and a separate > tracker captures this perfectly. It also means you can rank by priority > issues and see both bugs and backprots together (if you like). And I > think (?) the related issue only works within the same project (that is > at least true with the 'duplicate' relationship). > > Loic, I think this is a great idea (provided the bot does all the issue > creation). +1! I created the Backport tracker and we will migrate the pending issues & HOWTO accordingly. Cheers > > sage > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
