Hi all,
Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I'm not speaking officially for Liferay here, but I think JIRA's functionality in removing inactive tickets is based on the idea that "if it's that old and nobody has looked at it, it'll never get looked at." That doesn't seem very optimal from my point of view either, and I'll talk to the others about this. Thank you Tobias for bringing this up.
Fastbob, I appreciate you noticing that we've been upping our game in improving the documentation and organizing bug fixes recently. And Corne, yeah, we recognize that there are even user contributed fixes that haven't been applied. Some of our guys has begun going through those (and there are many) -- each ticket takes time though. I've personally been going through the forums looking for bugs that needed to be reproduced and getting them filed and assigned to appropriate code sprints for immediate/near future fixes. A single issue really does take a while to reproduce.
Shagul, yes! User contributions are so important -- but like Corne said, we haven't even been committing user contributions on the most part until recently. The mechanism is technically there however, in the JIRA. Why we haven't incorporated many contributions has a lot to do with time and manpower, but you're right and we recognize this as something we need to do more of.
What I've personally observed is that some community members will fix things and say how they did it in the forums, but then never make a ticket. In other cases, someone will provide great detail about a bug, but nobody replies or even looks at the post. Recently I've been able to create tickets with fairly detailed information that makes fixing easy based on such posts -- and since I have direct contact with the Liferay engineers, I bother people to get important things into the code sprints. This isn't ideal either though, because a user should be able to post only in JIRA and have the issue looked at and assigned.
I think what needs to happen is a cleanup of JIRA, combined with more Liferay engineers trawling the forums and updating the wiki. I'm a part of the latter improvement, as I've been spending a lot of time reproducing bugs from the forum. JIRA cleanup is on the way (actually what you observed is part of the JIRA cleanup...unfortunately), and I'm definitely going to bring up that ticket expiry issue. A lot of users post issues to JIRA expecting something to happen immediately, but assigning a developer to an issue asap isn't practical given the number of tickets. Instead, our goal should be that we can get the tickets assigned to different code sprints based on priority, so at least users know that the ticket has been reproduced and scheduled for fix.
I hope all will continue to post bugs here and in the JIRA. Ideally, we will be able to pick up the important issues and have them fixed in a timely manner, while incorporating user-contributed solutions. We are working hard to improve the process, and thank you all for such constructive criticism.
It's much appreciated!
Also, thanks for being such active community members. I've seen each of you in other threads at least a few times, haha.
Warm regards,
Sam
Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I'm not speaking officially for Liferay here, but I think JIRA's functionality in removing inactive tickets is based on the idea that "if it's that old and nobody has looked at it, it'll never get looked at." That doesn't seem very optimal from my point of view either, and I'll talk to the others about this. Thank you Tobias for bringing this up.
Fastbob, I appreciate you noticing that we've been upping our game in improving the documentation and organizing bug fixes recently. And Corne, yeah, we recognize that there are even user contributed fixes that haven't been applied. Some of our guys has begun going through those (and there are many) -- each ticket takes time though. I've personally been going through the forums looking for bugs that needed to be reproduced and getting them filed and assigned to appropriate code sprints for immediate/near future fixes. A single issue really does take a while to reproduce.
Shagul, yes! User contributions are so important -- but like Corne said, we haven't even been committing user contributions on the most part until recently. The mechanism is technically there however, in the JIRA. Why we haven't incorporated many contributions has a lot to do with time and manpower, but you're right and we recognize this as something we need to do more of.
What I've personally observed is that some community members will fix things and say how they did it in the forums, but then never make a ticket. In other cases, someone will provide great detail about a bug, but nobody replies or even looks at the post. Recently I've been able to create tickets with fairly detailed information that makes fixing easy based on such posts -- and since I have direct contact with the Liferay engineers, I bother people to get important things into the code sprints. This isn't ideal either though, because a user should be able to post only in JIRA and have the issue looked at and assigned.
I think what needs to happen is a cleanup of JIRA, combined with more Liferay engineers trawling the forums and updating the wiki. I'm a part of the latter improvement, as I've been spending a lot of time reproducing bugs from the forum. JIRA cleanup is on the way (actually what you observed is part of the JIRA cleanup...unfortunately), and I'm definitely going to bring up that ticket expiry issue. A lot of users post issues to JIRA expecting something to happen immediately, but assigning a developer to an issue asap isn't practical given the number of tickets. Instead, our goal should be that we can get the tickets assigned to different code sprints based on priority, so at least users know that the ticket has been reproduced and scheduled for fix.
I hope all will continue to post bugs here and in the JIRA. Ideally, we will be able to pick up the important issues and have them fixed in a timely manner, while incorporating user-contributed solutions. We are working hard to improve the process, and thank you all for such constructive criticism.
It's much appreciated!Also, thanks for being such active community members. I've seen each of you in other threads at least a few times, haha.
Warm regards,
Sam
Thanks Fastbob,
It's good to hear this advice from you -- I agree with all points made. We also do have to clean up the cruft; thanks to neglect on our part there are a plethora of duplicates in JIRA, random questions, and lack of standardization in general. Rest assured the leadership is aware of and working on these problems, and Liferay's always trying to incorporate the users better.
Even the recent release naming changes originated from suggestions made by users, and in recent days we've begun taking those user-contributed changes and really pushing to get them into commits. The issues list has become our friend in recent days as well, as I've seen issues being assigned correctly more often now than ever (seems like all the important issues are making it into the code sprints now -- huge improvement). We have a ways to go but a lot of things are seeing leaps and bounds in improvement.
Haha I'm definitely not one of the people who's in charge of the process, but I'm sure the higher-ups would be glad to meet with you if you ever had some time to share your ideas. Hope your work is going well also.
I really really thank you and the other guys for taking the time to answer so many questions on the forums and for understanding Liferay's struggles right now. It's always a blessing to have people who give good advice and with a kind tone! In the coming year, you should expect to see documentation improvements, a more well-managed JIRA, and less buggy GA releases.
Thanks for being part of our community
Warm regards,
Sam
It's good to hear this advice from you -- I agree with all points made. We also do have to clean up the cruft; thanks to neglect on our part there are a plethora of duplicates in JIRA, random questions, and lack of standardization in general. Rest assured the leadership is aware of and working on these problems, and Liferay's always trying to incorporate the users better.
Even the recent release naming changes originated from suggestions made by users, and in recent days we've begun taking those user-contributed changes and really pushing to get them into commits. The issues list has become our friend in recent days as well, as I've seen issues being assigned correctly more often now than ever (seems like all the important issues are making it into the code sprints now -- huge improvement). We have a ways to go but a lot of things are seeing leaps and bounds in improvement.
Haha I'm definitely not one of the people who's in charge of the process, but I'm sure the higher-ups would be glad to meet with you if you ever had some time to share your ideas. Hope your work is going well also.
I really really thank you and the other guys for taking the time to answer so many questions on the forums and for understanding Liferay's struggles right now. It's always a blessing to have people who give good advice and with a kind tone! In the coming year, you should expect to see documentation improvements, a more well-managed JIRA, and less buggy GA releases.
Thanks for being part of our community
Warm regards,
Sam
Thank you Samuel for talking to us
That is the only thing I want to. Give me information and everything (hopefully) will get better.
I saw some improvements today: Two tickets that I have submitted for LR 5.1.x and 5.2.x have been assigned to a sprint or a developer.
The only thing that is bothering me: They have been submitted in March 2009...
I'll be crossing fingers that fixing bugs from the community get a higher priority in the LR development process.
That is the only thing I want to. Give me information and everything (hopefully) will get better.
I saw some improvements today: Two tickets that I have submitted for LR 5.1.x and 5.2.x have been assigned to a sprint or a developer.
The only thing that is bothering me: They have been submitted in March 2009...
I'll be crossing fingers that fixing bugs from the community get a higher priority in the LR development process.
Absolutely Tobias,
Thanks for those tickets too. Yeah I can't believe it took so long -- I don't know if things were different a year ago but I hope that's not still happening. I joined Liferay a few months ago and even in these few months I've seen a lot of things change. Personally I'm working hard to get bugs with posts in the forums into the hands of the developers. I'd recommend posting in JIRA but also in the forums while we don't yet have this process down pat. In the future we're working toward being able to just look at JIRA and continuously reproduce/assign without delay though. Tomorrow I'll have a meeting with some of the others to discuss improving wiki documentation and JIRA. I'll be sure to bring up everything that was discussed on this thread.
So much to be done, thanks for having the patience to bear with us
I also wanted to note: 5.2.x CE has reached end of product life, so as it was explained to me, no new releases will be made on 5.2.x series unless you're EE. What that means for CE users is no new service packs in the same vein -- and in other words, 5.2.x bugs only get looked at if they get reproduced in the 6.0 series. The logic behind this is that, if there's a 5.2 bug that doesn't exist in 6.0 series, just upgrade to 6.0 to get it fixed. The alternative is to purchase an EE license where you get access to backported patches. Another alternative is to go get the patches which are technically available in JIRA...but that means digging, and knowing what you're looking for.
Only problem I see is that 6.0 upgrade process has some bugs. I think 6.0.5 will fix the main upgrade process problem right now, but I know for sure that the early 6.0 releases saw fairly buggy upgrades (a.k.a it's not recommended you upgrade to 6.0.1 or anything other than the latest GA). I've read about some 6.0.4 upgrade bugs regarding duplicate entries or something like that.
The reason I needed to mention that is that a lot of users don't understand why we close 5.2.x tickets sometimes, and it might appear that "they're just old." But most of the time it's because they can't be reproduced in 6.0, so since we're no longer maintaining 5.2.x CE, the ticket gets closed (they're "fixed"). When that was first explained to me I found it sub-optimal, but it makes sense given that EE is the only branch with official support / patches in the vein of 5.2.x, and that there is a patch, and you get it upgrading. If upgrade is too troublesome (or for some reason you don't want the new features or architectural changes in 6.0.x), you can purchase EE, which provides extended bugfix service packs for the 5.2.x series without making you upgrade to a new version/featureset.
Hope this has been helpful!
Warm regards,
Sam
Thanks for those tickets too. Yeah I can't believe it took so long -- I don't know if things were different a year ago but I hope that's not still happening. I joined Liferay a few months ago and even in these few months I've seen a lot of things change. Personally I'm working hard to get bugs with posts in the forums into the hands of the developers. I'd recommend posting in JIRA but also in the forums while we don't yet have this process down pat. In the future we're working toward being able to just look at JIRA and continuously reproduce/assign without delay though. Tomorrow I'll have a meeting with some of the others to discuss improving wiki documentation and JIRA. I'll be sure to bring up everything that was discussed on this thread.
So much to be done, thanks for having the patience to bear with us
I also wanted to note: 5.2.x CE has reached end of product life, so as it was explained to me, no new releases will be made on 5.2.x series unless you're EE. What that means for CE users is no new service packs in the same vein -- and in other words, 5.2.x bugs only get looked at if they get reproduced in the 6.0 series. The logic behind this is that, if there's a 5.2 bug that doesn't exist in 6.0 series, just upgrade to 6.0 to get it fixed. The alternative is to purchase an EE license where you get access to backported patches. Another alternative is to go get the patches which are technically available in JIRA...but that means digging, and knowing what you're looking for.
Only problem I see is that 6.0 upgrade process has some bugs. I think 6.0.5 will fix the main upgrade process problem right now, but I know for sure that the early 6.0 releases saw fairly buggy upgrades (a.k.a it's not recommended you upgrade to 6.0.1 or anything other than the latest GA). I've read about some 6.0.4 upgrade bugs regarding duplicate entries or something like that.
The reason I needed to mention that is that a lot of users don't understand why we close 5.2.x tickets sometimes, and it might appear that "they're just old." But most of the time it's because they can't be reproduced in 6.0, so since we're no longer maintaining 5.2.x CE, the ticket gets closed (they're "fixed"). When that was first explained to me I found it sub-optimal, but it makes sense given that EE is the only branch with official support / patches in the vein of 5.2.x, and that there is a patch, and you get it upgrading. If upgrade is too troublesome (or for some reason you don't want the new features or architectural changes in 6.0.x), you can purchase EE, which provides extended bugfix service packs for the 5.2.x series without making you upgrade to a new version/featureset.
Hope this has been helpful!
Warm regards,
Sam
Samuel Liu:
When we redo the wiki, we should really add this information, no doubt. In fact, when I get a chance I'll begin drafting something like this for the current wiki.
And when you do that just leave a message on this thread so we could read it and test the new procedure with our company testers
First of all thank you Jorge and Samuel for explaining some things.
Just keep talking to us! Communication helps to find solutions ;)
I understand the problems you are facing. In our company are developing software, that has its root in 1980-1983. So I know how hard it can be to track issues, bugs, proposals etc.
Legacy issues are very hard to understand and to fix, but if you don't notice (or ignore) them, they might follow you like Freddy Kruger in a nightmare (on Elmstreet).
But I have to state: Things have improved in the last days (after I started this thread - coincidence?). All of my upgrade related issues have been taking into notice! Thank you Liferay for this effort!
But lets get back to the Freddy Kruger: I started this issue in March 2009. It is now been handled, but as far as I know right now: I don't have the database anymore, that caused this problem.
Is it my fault? Maybe to a certain degree (It would have been easier, if this issue has been noticed by Liferay in March, April or May 2009).
Thank you for recognizing our needs. And thank you for taking them serious.
I don't think you did something "wrong". It was just the lack of information that was bothering me.
But I think it will all be better (I firmly believe it).
Keep it up! Finally Liferay Portal is a software, it love to work with
Just keep talking to us! Communication helps to find solutions ;)
I understand the problems you are facing. In our company are developing software, that has its root in 1980-1983. So I know how hard it can be to track issues, bugs, proposals etc.
Legacy issues are very hard to understand and to fix, but if you don't notice (or ignore) them, they might follow you like Freddy Kruger in a nightmare (on Elmstreet).
But I have to state: Things have improved in the last days (after I started this thread - coincidence?). All of my upgrade related issues have been taking into notice! Thank you Liferay for this effort!
But lets get back to the Freddy Kruger: I started this issue in March 2009. It is now been handled, but as far as I know right now: I don't have the database anymore, that caused this problem.
Is it my fault? Maybe to a certain degree (It would have been easier, if this issue has been noticed by Liferay in March, April or May 2009).
Jorge Ferrer:
Thanks again for caring, not only to create tickets, but also to complain when we do things wrong.
Thank you for recognizing our needs. And thank you for taking them serious.
I don't think you did something "wrong". It was just the lack of information that was bothering me.
But I think it will all be better (I firmly believe it).
Keep it up! Finally Liferay Portal is a software, it love to work with
Hi Tobias,
Sorry about that -- as you can see, we've filed those issues for the 6.1 release Thanks so much for reporting stuff like this too. The JIRA re-vamping should help us to avoid this in the future. It's still in progress, as is the wiki cleanup -- it's a daily battle but we're getting better!!
Warm regards,
Sam
Sorry about that -- as you can see, we've filed those issues for the 6.1 release
Thanks so much for reporting stuff like this too. The JIRA re-vamping should help us to avoid this in the future. It's still in progress, as is the wiki cleanup -- it's a daily battle but we're getting better!!Warm regards,
Sam
Hi all,
We're beginning another change and here it is:
Liferay Community Project: Tagging the Wiki
We're trying real hard to improve the documentation here and under everyone here's recommendation, we're reaching out to the community and asking for help: hopefully the wiki is going to see drastic improvements in coming days. Stay tuned
Warm regards,
Sam
We're beginning another change and here it is:
Liferay Community Project: Tagging the Wiki
We're trying real hard to improve the documentation here and under everyone here's recommendation, we're reaching out to the community and asking for help: hopefully the wiki is going to see drastic improvements in coming days. Stay tuned
Warm regards,
Sam
Sounds good; I'll definitely try to contribute. And thanks for following step 0 and letting us know the plans ahead of time.
Hi all,
thanks to Tobias for creating this thread. I was about creating some similar one but you hit the nail on the head. And thanks to Sam and Jorge for the explanation.
It's clear that there are to many tickets to solve at once. But to say it's fixed in trunk isn't...how should I say...the right way to do.
One example:
I've created a thread about the LayoutImporter Bugs at the 7th december of 2009 where Liferay 5.2.3 was the official release. For a short time I was in contact with a liferay dev but since then I don't get any feedback although I linked a jira ticket (a colleague created it) and added a lar file to reproduce the bug.
I don't want to wail because we fixed it in our ext so it's not a problem anymore. But for others who also still use 5.2.3 it would be great if it could be fixed because this bug can be a "show stopper" if the import of layouts doesn't work. BTW I don't tested it in the new Liferay 6 release.
I'm looking forward to all the improvements to come.
Greets Oli
thanks to Tobias for creating this thread. I was about creating some similar one but you hit the nail on the head. And thanks to Sam and Jorge for the explanation.
It's clear that there are to many tickets to solve at once. But to say it's fixed in trunk isn't...how should I say...the right way to do.
One example:
I've created a thread about the LayoutImporter Bugs at the 7th december of 2009 where Liferay 5.2.3 was the official release. For a short time I was in contact with a liferay dev but since then I don't get any feedback although I linked a jira ticket (a colleague created it) and added a lar file to reproduce the bug.
I don't want to wail because we fixed it in our ext so it's not a problem anymore. But for others who also still use 5.2.3 it would be great if it could be fixed because this bug can be a "show stopper" if the import of layouts doesn't work. BTW I don't tested it in the new Liferay 6 release.
I'm looking forward to all the improvements to come
.Greets Oli