Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Check Request # 22 - If Issue has no upstream link this should be justified #27

Closed
rpelisse opened this issue Dec 8, 2015 · 3 comments
Closed

Check Request # 22 - If Issue has no upstream link this should be justified #27

rpelisse opened this issue Dec 8, 2015 · 3 comments
Assignees
@rpelisse
Milestone
0.9.0

Comments

@rpelisse
Copy link
Contributor

rpelisse commented Dec 8, 2015

If a BZ is not linked to an upstream, JIRA issue, it should be justify by a comment featuring the sentence "no upstream required because..."
@rpelisse rpelisse changed the title NoJIRARequiresNoUpStreamRequireBecause Check Request # 23 - If Issue has no upstream link this should be justified May 13, 2016
@rpelisse rpelisse changed the title Check Request # 23 - If Issue has no upstream link this should be justified Check Request # 22 - If Issue has no upstream link this should be justified May 13, 2016
@rpelisse rpelisse self-assigned this May 13, 2016
@rpelisse rpelisse added this to the 0.9.0 milestone Oct 26, 2016
@rpelisse
Copy link
Contributor Author

FYI, I am working on a rather "naive" implementation of this that can work with the current features of Bugclerk. However, to make it proper #38 needs to be resolved.

@rpelisse
Copy link
Contributor Author

OK, this is implemented and here a some issues spot has missing upstream link below, let me know if you feel those are "false +" so I can tweak the check. Otherwise, this check will get released with 0.9.0.

Issues that really appears to have a missing upstream issues:

Those are sort of false+ but not because of the checks:

  • BZ1374159 - this issue would need to have the message "no upstream required" to be ignored
  • BZ1330495 - kind of a false+ because the bug appears to be a documentation but filed as bug for some reason

rpelisse added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 1, 2016
@rpelisse
Check Request #27 - Component Upgrade Target Release Does Not Match I…
20c8823 
…ssue
@rpelisse
Copy link
Contributor Author

rpelisse commented Dec 1, 2016

Implemented and released with Bugclerk 0.9.0.Final.

@rpelisse rpelisse closed this as completed Dec 1, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@rpelisse rpelisse

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
0.9.0
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@rpelisse