[wildfly-dev] Jirban board for WFLY feature requests/Jira cleanup

[Kabir Khan]

> On 6 Dec 2017, at 11:36, Kabir Khan <kkhan at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> I have set up a Jirban board for WFLY, which can be found at [1] (log into issues.jboss.org first). It effectively uses the following JQL:
> 
> 	project = WFLY and status != Closed and issuetype = "Feature Request" and (level is EMPTY and "Security Sensitive Issue" is EMPTY)
> 
> As you can see, it currently displays only feature requests.
> 
> However, if I organise this into swimlanes by fix version [2] it seems that there a lot of issues in the Resolved state for old releases. 
> 
> I think these resolved issues should be closed. Firstly, I believe this is 'The Jira Way'. Secondly, it keeps the Jirban cache of issues on the server as small as possible, as the issues in the states configured to be 'done' in the Jirban config (i.e. Closed) are not cached. Also, the list of Fix Versions in the Jirban filters is populated from the issue data, so a nice side effect will be to keep that list more manageable. At the moment there are too many versions in there to make much sense out of it.
> 
> [3] contains a query for all issues in released versions. Here ' 10.x.x TBD' is a bit strange, but I assume these must have been released as part of something by now?
> 
> Then we have a few with Fix Version 'Awaiting Volunteers': [4] 
> 
> There is a very mysterious Fix Version 'No Release': [5]
> 
> Then we have many resolved issues with no fix version but which have been done [6]
> 
> Finally we have a load of unresolved issues with no fix version which are rejected, duplicates, out of date etc. [7]
> 
> If my queries seem ok, I'd like to bulk close all of these. The ones from [4], [5] and [6] need a bit of care, but hopefully the date they were resolved can help figure out which release they went into. Or perhaps since they have been resolved with a strange fix version for so long, it doesn't matter if they are closed against that version either?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Kabir
> 
> 
> 
> [1] https://issues.jboss.org/jirban/index.html#/board?board=WFLY
[1] should have been https://issues.jboss.org/jirban/index.html#/board?board=WFLY-fr
> 
> [2] https://issues.jboss.org/jirban/index.html#/board?board=WFLY-fr&bl=true&swimlane=fix-version
> [3] https://issues.jboss.org/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WFLY%20and%20status%20%3D%20Resolved%20and%20fixVersion%20in%20(10.0.0.Alpha1%2C%20%2010.0.0.Alpha2%2C%20%2010.0.0.Alpha3%2C%2010.0.0.Alpha4%2C%2010.0.0.Alpha5%2C%2010.0.0.Alpha6%2C%2010.0.0.Beta1%2C%2010.0.0.Beta2%2C%2010.0.0.CR1%2C%2010.0.0.CR2%2C%20%2010.0.0.CR3%2C%20%2010.0.0.CR4%2C%2010.0.0.CR5%2C%2010.0.0.Final%2C%2010.1.0.CR1%2C%2010.1.0.Final%2C%20%2710.x.x%20TBD%27%2C%20%2011.0.0.Alpha1%2C%20%2011.0.0.Beta1%2C%20%2011.0.0.CR1%2C%20%2011.0.0.Final%2C%20%20%208.0.0.Alpha1%2C%20%208.0.0.Alpha2%2C%20%208.0.0.Alpha3%2C%20%208.0.0.Alpha4%2C%20%208.0.0.Beta1%2C%208.0.0.CR1%2C%20%208.0.0.Final%2C%208.1.0.CR1%2C%20%208.1.0.CR2%2C%20%208.1.0.Final%2C%20%208.2.0.Final%2C%20%209.0.0.Alpha1%2C%20%209.0.0.Beta1%2C%20%209.0.0.Beta2%2C%20%209.0.0.CR1%2C%20%209.0.0.CR2%2C%20%209.0.0.Final%2C%20%209.0.1.Final%2C%20%20%27JBoss%20AS7%207.1.1.Final%27)%0A
> [4] https://issues.jboss.org/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WFLY%20and%20status%20%3D%20Resolved%20and%20fixVersion%20in%20(%22Awaiting%20Volunteers%22)%0A
> [5] https://issues.jboss.org/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WFLY%20and%20status%20%3D%20Resolved%20and%20fixVersion%20in%20(%22No%20Release%22)%0A
> [6] https://issues.jboss.org/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WFLY%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Resolved%20AND%20fixVersion%20is%20EMPTY%20and%20resolution%20in%20(Done%2C%20%22Resolved%20at%20Apache%22)
> [7] https://issues.jboss.org/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20WFLY%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Resolved%20AND%20fixVersion%20is%20EMPTY%20and%20resolution%20not%20in%20(Done%2C%20%22Resolved%20at%20Apache%22)