Problem: I have several related issues, then I
create an umbrela issue for them turning
original issues to tasks and create a
dependency. I can also mark them as
duplicates. Unfortunatelly new umbrella issue
has 0 votes (similarly for duplicates).
Solution: votes should propagate (be derived)
over dependecies (and duplications).
While I guess (?) this will not happen for IZ, Collab pls
consider this for Scarab.
I'll look into this for Scarab.
The ColalbNet tracking number for this enhancement is PCN11587.
Product Management is looking at this enhancement and would like some
additional information on how you would like it to work. Please
consider each of the following questions and add any other details
that may come to mind.
"What is the right order of propagating votes?
If issue #2 is marked as a duplicate of issue #1 do they both have the
same # of votes, or does just issue #1 have the accumulated votes?
Do votes only accumulate for the blocked issue? For example, if issue
#3 blocks issue #4, does issue #3 accumulate any votes? I would
actually assume that only issue #4 would accumulate issue #3's votes
and issue #3 would be
What about the propagation of votes made after the dependencies are
established? How should this work?"
> If issue #2 is marked as a duplicate of issue #1 do
> they both have the same # of votes, or does just
> issue #1 have the accumulated votes?
Actually the dup issue #2 is closed, so it's better to add votes to
issue #1 (note that the same people may vote for both issues, so the
check is needed).
> Do votes only accumulate for the blocked issue? For
> example, if issue #3 blocks issue #4, does issue #3
> accumulate any votes? I would actually assume that only
> issue #4 would accumulate issue #3's votes
> and issue #3 would be unaffected.
Yes, perfectly correct.
umbrella #1 (depends on #2),
subumbrella #2 blocks #1 (depends on #3),
issue #3 blocks #2
Then #2 will cumulate votes from #3, and
#1 will cumulate from #2 (both #2's and #3's votes),
Thanks for your clarification. We've passed this
information along to Product Management and will plan to
update the issue as soon as we have more information from
them. Please let us know if there are any other thoughts on
this issue or concerns about the time frame for the next
Change in our Update Plan:
Our plan is to provide a status update for this issue in 2
weeks. Please let us know if there are concerns about the
timeframe for the next update.
Update: This is being considered for the truckee 2 release
Action Plan: Check regularly for updates from Product
Management on target milestone.
Next update: Within 2 weeks
Update: Clarifying that this is being considered for Scarab in Truckee
2, not IssueZilla.
Action Plan: Check in on internal issue again the first week of December.
Next Update: By 12-6-02
Update: i asked management to provide update on the status of this
request which could be in scarab
action plan: monitor internal issue for updates by management
next update: in two weeks
update: the management will consider this request:'we have not
determined the features that we are planning to add to Scarab/Project
tracker in the next release. When we do we will consider whether to
add this. I expect we will get to that point somewhere around the end
Action plan: keep monitoring internal issue for updates
Next update: in three weeks
no update in internal issue pcn 11587. will monitor that for any change.
next update: end of January.
update: I asked management again for an update on this issue
next udpate: upon reply for management
update: i reminded our management that client would like to know
'date/commitment to implement' if that possible.
action plan: waiting on management's reply.
update: i'd convey the management position:
'will get to the point where we have an agreed to description of the
release and schedule for developing it sometime in April.'
> sometime in April
Today is 4th April,
I asked for an engineering update on this issue.
Update this issue with an engineering response.
I will update this issue by 4/11
I received an update saying this is still slated for t2, but I didn't
get the information that I think we are looking for. So, I pushed back
on them to update this issue with the agreed to description of the t2
release. I will update this issue by 4/20 or earlier if possible.
I juist got this update from engineering.
Based on when we actually get the Product Requirement Documentaion, we
aren't going to know what is
going in or out until probably mid-May now. At that point, we'll have
some "definite" items and some "maybe" items.
We might do some voting, but gathering those up across dependencies
will probably take more time
than we have available before the T2 release.
Eric, mid-may passed long ago...
So, is this a "definite todo" item or not?
There hasn't been any updates to the issue. looks like it is not going
to be in truckee2 or plan truckee2. I have pinged the product manager
on this issue to double check.
I will update the issue when I get an update.
Product management gave me the following update.
Offering voting in Project Tracker has been scoped out of T2 and will
be considered for a post-T2 release.
Update: Setting the status of this issue to Resolved,
Fixed. The solution for this issue has a target milestone
of "Plan- Truckee3".
Action Plan: CollabNet support will review this issue
during the upgrade to this release to confirm its
resolution. If there are problems with the solution we will
reopen this issue. If the solution appears to be working,
we will reassign the issue to the original poster,
requesting confirmation The original poster can then set
the status to "Closed" or "Reopened" if necessary.
Next Update: CollabNet support will review this issue
during the staging process for the next upgrade.
*** Issue 47233 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
CollabNet support - please verify which version of CEE this is
fixed in, associate version number to nickname. i.e. - Is Truckee 3
equated to version 3.0?
Given the level of effort involved, this enhancement will not be
able to make it into Danube.
Also, the requirements regarding the voting need to be fleshed out.
CollabNet is proposing some discussions regarding this issue. I have
updated the whiteboard accordingly.
Updated the whiteboard for release name revision.
This was not implemented in IZ and there's no voting feature in Scarab.
Reopening this issue
*** Issue 53479 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Any chance the duplicate rollup issue could be implemented now, and the
blocking/umbrella issue be resolved separately?
In issue 53479, it was stated that "Project Tracker" would have this vote
handling capability. Was it incorporated in this latest change to the web site?
If not, is this an internal Sun effort, an open source effort, or something
else? Is there an URL to find out more information about Project Tracker?
We are considering to provide this enhancement for IZ in one of our future
releases. Marking this issue as Resolved Later. Support will continue to track
this issue internally and review it in the corresponding release.
Please don't close this issue without giving a URL or something to track. It is very frustrating to have an issue with
a number of votes marked as a duplicate of some other issue, without having the votes "roll up" to the primary issue.
Can just this part be implemented without all the other concerns originally stated?
Note: We are not closing issues, we are marking as Resolved later with the appropriate Target Milestone in order to
assign into the correct bucket for us to review the case when the issue is fixed in the future release.
This is ridiculous - this problem has been open since 2002 and no one is fixing it. It
has happened to me several times that I would file an issue, people would vote for it,
and then it would get marked as a duplicate of another issue and lose all the votes.
Even worse, I recently had an important issue collect 25+ votes when it was decided that
the issue belonged into a different component. When it was moved, again all the votes
How can the importance/priority of an issue be ascertained, if the issue tracking
system keeps dumping all the votes?
I have never complained about this, but have been frustrated by it. I don't even know if issue votes really matter and
I have certainly been discouraged from voting because of this issue.
If the Netbeans team is interested in tracking issues by votes, then it would seem appropriate that they do everything
possible to make sure this process is not frustrating. With things like this, it often doesn't take much to discourage
people from taking action. And once a large percentage of people don't believe in it, the whole system can become futile.
I still occasionally vote for things, but when my votes get dumped, I don't think I have ever taken the time to put my
I am sitting here with a smile on my face anticipating that this issue will be re-categorized, and the 3 votes garnered
so far to be lost as well. ;)
This is not an "enhancement" but a defect. having the system zero-out votes when a bug is marked as a duplicate, etc. is a DEFECT and should be fixed.
The fact that it has sat open for 5 years points to the fact that it will never get fixed. But it's not an "enhancement" to stop votes from being dumped. It's a
We will discuss about this with our internal team and will keep you posted once we get more information on this as soon
Back in 2002 there were discussions about what to do with votes under all kinds of conditions. Umbrella issues, etc.
That would be an enhancement and should be its own issue. What I (and others) want is a fix for two small defects.
1. If an issue is marked as a duplicate of another issue, move the votes from the initial issue to the second issue,
even if it puts someone over their "quota" for that category.
2. If an issue is recategorized, keep the votes, even if it puts someone over their "quota" for that category.
Keeping the votes accurate IMHO is far more important than if someone is over some vote limit through no fault of their
I am marking this issue with the current netcat symbol in hopes that the increased visibility will have a positive effect.
I also realize that the title of this issue is actually one of the "enhancement" issues. However, all other issues that
I can find about these specific bugs have eventually been marked as duplicates of this issue.
(http://www.netbeans.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=47233, http://www.netbeans.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=72474, etc.)
Has these defects been filed with CollabNet? If so, can the URL be put here so we can follow the activity and status?
If that URL is not public can that status and activity be copied into this issue?
This has been fixed in CEE 5.2 p1. Refer issue 47233 desc26.Marking as fixed
We recently moved out from Collabnet's infrastructure