There's nothing stopping leads (or others) from commenting on issues
with questions and/or more information, also.  I'm more inclined to do
that when I look at an issue and think "this isn't assigned to me, so
I better make a note for whoever works the issue instead of just
writing it on a forgotten notepad somewhere".  Even if it ends up
being me, it's helpful.

On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 9:58 AM, Brian Stansberry
<brian.stansberry@redhat.com> wrote:
> I'm in favor of this change.
>
> I think in most cases it's important for people to communicate with
> component leads before they start doing much on an issue. But having the
> issued assigned to the lead hasn't AFAICT help ensure that kind of
> communication.
>
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 9:41 AM, Andrig Miller <anmiller@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Good points.  The issue has always been getting component leads to triage
>> their issues on a regular enough basis.
>>
>> If this is just hiding that problem, and causing issues with community
>> involvement, I am all for going back to unassigned.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 8:39 AM, David Lloyd <david.lloyd@redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Speaking for myself, I'd rather have issues unassigned because having
>>> it assigned means "do not work on this; someone else is going to".
>>> Then they just sit like that, maybe for years.
>>>
>>> I think having a default assignee is hiding the symptom while at the
>>> same time discouraging volunteers from taking issues.  It's even worse
>>> now that we have multiple teams within Red Hat itself who want to work
>>> issues.  I often get emails like "I see that WFLY-xxx is assigned to
>>> you; is it OK if I take it?"  For every one of these, there may be
>>> several (internal or external) where they just give up because the
>>> issue is "assigned", and they just wait forever for someone to deliver
>>> the fix/feature for them.
>>>
>>> We see every issue as they are created.  If we don't take an issue at
>>> that time, being honest, are we really ever going to do it?
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Andrig Miller <anmiller@redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > This is the way it was a long time ago, and then we moved to default to
>>> > the
>>> > component lead because so many issues were being left in the unassigned
>>> > state.
>>> >
>>> > Perhaps the default assignment just makes thing "look" better, and
>>> > doesn't
>>> > force triage to occur, or perhaps it does?
>>> >
>>> > I think we just think about this a little more, since we made the
>>> > change
>>> > because of such a mountain of issues being in the unassigned state.
>>> >
>>> > Andy
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 8:20 AM, David Lloyd <david.lloyd@redhat.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> This is something we've talked about before.  I think we should move
>>> >> forward on this for the WFLY and WFCORE projects.
>>> >>
>>> >> Ideally we'd also have a "responsible person" field which would be
>>> >> populated by the component lead by default.  But I don't think this is
>>> >> necessary as long as our component leads are triaging issues in their
>>> >> areas (which they should be).
>>> >>
>>> >> I think we should just do it.  WDYT?
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> - DML
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> wildfly-dev mailing list
>>> >> wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org
>>> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Andrig (Andy) T. Miller
>>> > Global Platform Director, Middleware
>>> > Red Hat, Inc.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> - DML
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Andrig (Andy) T. Miller
>> Global Platform Director, Middleware
>> Red Hat, Inc.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> wildfly-dev mailing list
>> wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>
>
>
>
> --
> Brian Stansberry
> Manager, Senior Principal Software Engineer
> Red Hat



--
- DML
_______________________________________________
wildfly-dev mailing list
wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev