Moodle
  1. Moodle
  2. MDL-21180

Category children default to extra credit when category agg is switched from Weighted to Simple

    Details

    • Testing Instructions:
      Hide

      NOTE: Following test should be run with default weight values. If weight is present then arrgregarecoef is not modified (to avoid data loss), while changing between the aggregation.

      1. Go to course with multiple activities
      2. Create grade category (C1)
      3. Set aggregation for C1 to Weighted Mean of Grades
      4. Check its children all have weights assigned to them
      5. Change C1 aggregation method to Simple weighted mean of grades
      6. Make sure children are not set extra credit
      7. Change C1 aggregation method to Weighted Mean of Grades
      8. Make sure children are set with weight 1.0
      9. Change C1 aggregation method to Mean of weight (With extra credit)
      10. Make sure children are set with weight 0.0
      11. Change C1 aggregation method to Sum of grades
      12. Make sure children are not set with extra credit
      13. Change C1 aggregation method to Weighted Mean of Grades
      14. Make sure children are set with weight 1.0

      Test 2

      – Run phpunit lib/grade/tests/grade_category_test.php

      Show
      NOTE: Following test should be run with default weight values. If weight is present then arrgregarecoef is not modified (to avoid data loss), while changing between the aggregation. Go to course with multiple activities Create grade category (C1) Set aggregation for C1 to Weighted Mean of Grades Check its children all have weights assigned to them Change C1 aggregation method to Simple weighted mean of grades Make sure children are not set extra credit Change C1 aggregation method to Weighted Mean of Grades Make sure children are set with weight 1.0 Change C1 aggregation method to Mean of weight (With extra credit) Make sure children are set with weight 0.0 Change C1 aggregation method to Sum of grades Make sure children are not set with extra credit Change C1 aggregation method to Weighted Mean of Grades Make sure children are set with weight 1.0 Test 2 – Run phpunit lib/grade/tests/grade_category_test.php
    • Affected Branches:
      MOODLE_19_STABLE, MOODLE_23_STABLE, MOODLE_24_STABLE, MOODLE_25_STABLE
    • Fixed Branches:
      MOODLE_24_STABLE, MOODLE_25_STABLE, MOODLE_26_STABLE
    • Pull 2.6 Branch:
      wip-mdl-21180-m26
    • Pull Master Branch:
      wip-mdl-21180
    • Story Points (Obsolete):
      40
    • Sprint:
      BACKEND Sprint 8

      Description

      Category 1 is set to Weighted Mean of Grades
      Its children all have weights assigned to them
      Category 1's agg method is switched to Simple weighted mean of grades
      Its chlldren are now all extra credit

      This was kinda, supposedly fixed with MDL-19407 but only took into account an item moved from a category of WM to SWM... not if the entire category is switched (common in our parts).

        Gliffy Diagrams

        1. aggchangeextracredit022410.patch
          1.0 kB
          Bob Puffer
        2. extracredit_umn_RT57186.patch
          4 kB
          Elena Ivanova
        3. switchaggnoextracredit.patch
          1.0 kB
          Bob Puffer

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            Elena Ivanova added a comment -

            Nice catch, and really needs fixing.
            Just in case - this also happens when you switch from WM what had some weights assigned to SUM.

            Show
            Elena Ivanova added a comment - Nice catch, and really needs fixing. Just in case - this also happens when you switch from WM what had some weights assigned to SUM.
            Hide
            Wen Hao Chuang added a comment -

            I'm bumping up the priority of this one (if I may). Just curious, Elena is UM's solution similar to Rober's posted patch? If not, would it be possible to post your patch here in this ticket please? Thanks!

            Show
            Wen Hao Chuang added a comment - I'm bumping up the priority of this one (if I may). Just curious, Elena is UM's solution similar to Rober's posted patch? If not, would it be possible to post your patch here in this ticket please? Thanks!
            Hide
            Bob Puffer added a comment -

            The patch should also include Elena's mention of it happening with SUM agg also. Let me know if you want me to rewrite it.

            Show
            Bob Puffer added a comment - The patch should also include Elena's mention of it happening with SUM agg also. Let me know if you want me to rewrite it.
            Hide
            Wen Hao Chuang added a comment - - edited

            Hi Robert, I took a look at your patch and also tried it out and tested it on 1.9.7. At the site setting, for the aggregation if you only have TWO aggregation types selected: "Sum of grades" and "Weighted mean of grades" (default at using "Weighted mean of grades"). Then, go back to a random testing course, if you only have two assignments, go into gradebook and have the "Choose an action" pull-down menu select to "Categories and items" -> "Simple View". Now change the two assignments with different "weight" numbers (e.g. 1, 2, 3..etc.). Then select the pull-down menu from "Weighted mean of grades" to "Sum of grades". You will see all the "Extra Credit" checkboxes are automatically checked (incorrect behavior). This is the behavior that I'm talking about and your patch didn't resolve this use case.

            I think the thing is that your patch is inserted under the if statement of

            if (!is_null($category) && !is_null($aggregationtype) && confirm_sesskey()) {

            However, in normal cases (e.g. just two assignments), it doesn't seem to go into this if block (both $category and $aggregationtype are null)... so it doesn't run your inserted codes. Thoughts or comments? If you could rewrite it a little bit that would be great! Thanks!

            Show
            Wen Hao Chuang added a comment - - edited Hi Robert, I took a look at your patch and also tried it out and tested it on 1.9.7. At the site setting, for the aggregation if you only have TWO aggregation types selected: "Sum of grades" and "Weighted mean of grades" (default at using "Weighted mean of grades"). Then, go back to a random testing course, if you only have two assignments, go into gradebook and have the "Choose an action" pull-down menu select to "Categories and items" -> "Simple View". Now change the two assignments with different "weight" numbers (e.g. 1, 2, 3..etc.). Then select the pull-down menu from "Weighted mean of grades" to "Sum of grades". You will see all the "Extra Credit" checkboxes are automatically checked (incorrect behavior). This is the behavior that I'm talking about and your patch didn't resolve this use case. I think the thing is that your patch is inserted under the if statement of if (!is_null($category) && !is_null($aggregationtype) && confirm_sesskey()) { However, in normal cases (e.g. just two assignments), it doesn't seem to go into this if block (both $category and $aggregationtype are null)... so it doesn't run your inserted codes. Thoughts or comments? If you could rewrite it a little bit that would be great! Thanks!
            Hide
            Bob Puffer added a comment -

            I believe the patch is inserted at the correct point. What isn't happening is the consideration of SUM of grades aggregation (mentioned above). I'll correct the patch to take into account a switch involving SUM.

            Show
            Bob Puffer added a comment - I believe the patch is inserted at the correct point. What isn't happening is the consideration of SUM of grades aggregation (mentioned above). I'll correct the patch to take into account a switch involving SUM.
            Hide
            Bob Puffer added a comment -

            Allows the "changed to" aggregation method to be anything other than WM.

            Show
            Bob Puffer added a comment - Allows the "changed to" aggregation method to be anything other than WM.
            Hide
            Bob Puffer added a comment -

            Updated patch attached.

            Show
            Bob Puffer added a comment - Updated patch attached.
            Hide
            Wen Hao Chuang added a comment -

            Hi Robert, I took a look at your updated patch and in general it works fine. Nice work!

            Just an observation. Currently with this patch, if you switch from WM (Weighted mean of grades) to SUM (Sum of grades), it will reset the aggregationcoef to 0 (thus making the "Extra Credit" checkboxes unchecked). However, if you switch from SUM to WM with some assignments "checked" as "Extra Credit", it will then convert those "Extra Credit" (using aggregationcoef) to "Weight = 1", while I think it should be reset to "Weight = 0" (as if your default aggregation is WM, which give you intial Weight value as 0). What do you think?

            Also, I think a possible improvement would be adding a confirmation pop-up window (possibly using the notice_yesno() function defined in /lib/weblib.php at around line 6013) when people are switching between SUM and WM, to warn them that their "Weight" or "Extra Credit" will get reset if they switch to another aggregation. What do you think? I will be curious to see if this is how Elena implemented in UM's Moodle installation. I'm also adding Tim to the Watching list. Tim do you think maybe we should get this fix into the core? Thanks!

            Show
            Wen Hao Chuang added a comment - Hi Robert, I took a look at your updated patch and in general it works fine. Nice work! Just an observation. Currently with this patch, if you switch from WM (Weighted mean of grades) to SUM (Sum of grades), it will reset the aggregationcoef to 0 (thus making the "Extra Credit" checkboxes unchecked). However, if you switch from SUM to WM with some assignments "checked" as "Extra Credit", it will then convert those "Extra Credit" (using aggregationcoef) to "Weight = 1", while I think it should be reset to "Weight = 0" (as if your default aggregation is WM, which give you intial Weight value as 0). What do you think? Also, I think a possible improvement would be adding a confirmation pop-up window (possibly using the notice_yesno() function defined in /lib/weblib.php at around line 6013) when people are switching between SUM and WM, to warn them that their "Weight" or "Extra Credit" will get reset if they switch to another aggregation. What do you think? I will be curious to see if this is how Elena implemented in UM's Moodle installation. I'm also adding Tim to the Watching list. Tim do you think maybe we should get this fix into the core? Thanks!
            Hide
            Elena Ivanova added a comment -

            Yep, we did this:

            • if you switch to WM - everything is set at weight of 1
            • If you switch to SWM/SUM - everything is set at 0 (aka unchecked for extra credit)
              I thought it was more logical )
              We do not have a warning pop-up message though.

            I will check with our programmers to see if we can provide a code for this.

            Show
            Elena Ivanova added a comment - Yep, we did this: if you switch to WM - everything is set at weight of 1 If you switch to SWM/SUM - everything is set at 0 (aka unchecked for extra credit) I thought it was more logical ) We do not have a warning pop-up message though. I will check with our programmers to see if we can provide a code for this.
            Hide
            Bob Puffer added a comment -

            Thanks Elena. If we think this is going into core I agree we should provide the pop-up. Let me know – be glad to rework it.

            Show
            Bob Puffer added a comment - Thanks Elena. If we think this is going into core I agree we should provide the pop-up. Let me know – be glad to rework it.
            Hide
            Elena Ivanova added a comment -

            Here we go
            Attached is a patch file - extracredit_umn_RT57186.patch
            This patch contains the changes that we made for the extra credit fix in addition to the MDL-19407 commit by nicolasconnault dated Sep 17, 2009.

            Show
            Elena Ivanova added a comment - Here we go Attached is a patch file - extracredit_umn_RT57186.patch This patch contains the changes that we made for the extra credit fix in addition to the MDL-19407 commit by nicolasconnault dated Sep 17, 2009.
            Hide
            Wen Hao Chuang added a comment -

            Hi Nicolas, I noticed that you have recently committed some codes into the /lib/grade/grade_item.php and so on and you are familiar with the current issue with WM, SWM, and SUM, etc. Could you please take a look at this patch supplied by Elena and Robert and see if we could get this patch into the CORE?

            The only thing that I have noticed for Elena's patch (filename: extracredit_umn_RT57186.patch) is that when you have a "grade item" of "Mean of grades (with extra credits)" that is set to, say, 6. And then you move this "grade item" (e.g. Quiz1 in my attached screenshot) from "Mean of grades (with extra credits)" category to "Simple weighted mean of grades" category, the "Extra Credit" will be checked (which I suppose it should be like that, as according to the HELP text, For Weighted Mean of Grades (extra credit), "A value greater than 0 treats this grade item's grades as Extra credit during aggregation"... Thoughts or comments about this? Thanks!

            Show
            Wen Hao Chuang added a comment - Hi Nicolas, I noticed that you have recently committed some codes into the /lib/grade/grade_item.php and so on and you are familiar with the current issue with WM, SWM, and SUM, etc. Could you please take a look at this patch supplied by Elena and Robert and see if we could get this patch into the CORE? The only thing that I have noticed for Elena's patch (filename: extracredit_umn_RT57186.patch) is that when you have a "grade item" of "Mean of grades (with extra credits)" that is set to, say, 6. And then you move this "grade item" (e.g. Quiz1 in my attached screenshot) from "Mean of grades (with extra credits)" category to "Simple weighted mean of grades" category, the "Extra Credit" will be checked (which I suppose it should be like that, as according to the HELP text, For Weighted Mean of Grades (extra credit), "A value greater than 0 treats this grade item's grades as Extra credit during aggregation"... Thoughts or comments about this? Thanks!
            Hide
            Michael de Raadt added a comment -

            Thanks for reporting this issue.

            We have detected that this issue has been inactive for over a year has been recorded as affecting versions that are no longer supported.

            If you believe that this issue is still relevant to current versions (2.3 and beyond), please comment on the issue. Issues left inactive for a further month will be closed.

            Michael d;

            4d6f6f646c6521

            Show
            Michael de Raadt added a comment - Thanks for reporting this issue. We have detected that this issue has been inactive for over a year has been recorded as affecting versions that are no longer supported. If you believe that this issue is still relevant to current versions (2.3 and beyond), please comment on the issue. Issues left inactive for a further month will be closed. Michael d; 4d6f6f646c6521
            Hide
            Bob Puffer added a comment -

            We are seeing this issue on 2.32. Same thing as what happened in 1.9 – switch from Weighted to Simple and everything's extra credit. Takes two times through the list to actually have the change take.

            Show
            Bob Puffer added a comment - We are seeing this issue on 2.32. Same thing as what happened in 1.9 – switch from Weighted to Simple and everything's extra credit. Takes two times through the list to actually have the change take.
            Hide
            Chris Follin added a comment -

            Michael, we're still seeing this in 2.3.3.

            Show
            Chris Follin added a comment - Michael, we're still seeing this in 2.3.3.
            Hide
            Andrew Davis added a comment -

            This issue was assigned to me automatically, however I will not be able to work on this issue in the immediate future. In order to create a truer sense of the state of this issue and to allow other developers to have chance to become involved, I am removing myself as the assignee of this issue.

            For more information, see http://docs.moodle.org/dev/Changes_to_issue_assignment

            Show
            Andrew Davis added a comment - This issue was assigned to me automatically, however I will not be able to work on this issue in the immediate future. In order to create a truer sense of the state of this issue and to allow other developers to have chance to become involved, I am removing myself as the assignee of this issue. For more information, see http://docs.moodle.org/dev/Changes_to_issue_assignment
            Hide
            Michael Woods added a comment -

            This is still happening in 2.4.3+, and is causing some big issues for our live reporting of grades. Please, can this be looked at?

            Show
            Michael Woods added a comment - This is still happening in 2.4.3+, and is causing some big issues for our live reporting of grades. Please, can this be looked at?
            Hide
            Bob Puffer added a comment -

            UMN's patch still works on 2.5+ so it should work through the 2.x releases – found at top of this issue or here:
            https://tracker.moodle.org/secure/attachment/19654/extracredit_umn_RT57186.patch

            Show
            Bob Puffer added a comment - UMN's patch still works on 2.5+ so it should work through the 2.x releases – found at top of this issue or here: https://tracker.moodle.org/secure/attachment/19654/extracredit_umn_RT57186.patch
            Hide
            Michael Woods added a comment - - edited

            Thanks Robert. Yes, have tested and applied the patch to my 2.4.4+ site and works as described.

            Show
            Michael Woods added a comment - - edited Thanks Robert. Yes, have tested and applied the patch to my 2.4.4+ site and works as described.
            Hide
            Michael Woods added a comment -

            Hi,

            This issue exists in 2.6dev (Build: 20130920). The supplied patch (extracredit_umn_RT57186.patch) still fixes it as well.

            Thanks,
            Michael

            Show
            Michael Woods added a comment - Hi, This issue exists in 2.6dev (Build: 20130920). The supplied patch (extracredit_umn_RT57186.patch) still fixes it as well. Thanks, Michael
            Hide
            Bob Puffer added a comment -

            This has gone on forever, being fixed and regressing. Would be nice if nobody has to look at this issue again.

            Show
            Bob Puffer added a comment - This has gone on forever, being fixed and regressing. Would be nice if nobody has to look at this issue again.
            Hide
            Martin Dougiamas added a comment -

            Assignee, please double check that MDL-36063 is really a duplicate. If so you can close that one.

            Show
            Martin Dougiamas added a comment - Assignee, please double check that MDL-36063 is really a duplicate. If so you can close that one.
            Hide
            Rajesh Taneja added a comment -

            Thanks for reporting this Robert and providing patch.

            Patch looks good, but I am not sure of the approach.
            According to current patch value of aggregationcoef will be reset every time user change aggregation. This might be needed in your case, but for some users they will loose aggregationcoef and have to enter again.

            In my understanding, weight should not be editable the way it is done now.

            1. Make Aggregation drop-down as label, showing current aggregation used.
            2. On category editing page, provide checkbox to let user choose if old aggregationcoef should be reset, by default it can be set to true.

            Looking for more feedback, before starting work on this.

            Show
            Rajesh Taneja added a comment - Thanks for reporting this Robert and providing patch. Patch looks good, but I am not sure of the approach. According to current patch value of aggregationcoef will be reset every time user change aggregation. This might be needed in your case, but for some users they will loose aggregationcoef and have to enter again. In my understanding, weight should not be editable the way it is done now. Make Aggregation drop-down as label, showing current aggregation used. On category editing page, provide checkbox to let user choose if old aggregationcoef should be reset, by default it can be set to true. Looking for more feedback, before starting work on this.
            Hide
            Eric Merrill added a comment -

            Yeah, loosing the coef if you change modes is a bad thing®. If someone is either experimenting with agg modes, or accidentally changes it, it would hose their gradebook.

            Really, to me, the coefficient and the EC flag shouldn't be stored in the same field - it just seems like a shoehorning of behavior to save a DB column. There was some talk about this in the forums, but it was unfortunately some of the lost info.

            Show
            Eric Merrill added a comment - Yeah, loosing the coef if you change modes is a bad thing®. If someone is either experimenting with agg modes, or accidentally changes it, it would hose their gradebook. Really, to me, the coefficient and the EC flag shouldn't be stored in the same field - it just seems like a shoehorning of behavior to save a DB column. There was some talk about this in the forums, but it was unfortunately some of the lost info.
            Hide
            Michael Woods added a comment -

            I agree that the dual purpose of the field is not ideal. I suspect the only way to properly solve this is to add a standalone extra credit field. However, given the current db structure, I think the patch provides a better outcome than the existing behaviour.

            Show
            Michael Woods added a comment - I agree that the dual purpose of the field is not ideal. I suspect the only way to properly solve this is to add a standalone extra credit field. However, given the current db structure, I think the patch provides a better outcome than the existing behaviour.
            Hide
            Rajesh Taneja added a comment -

            Thanks Michael and Eric for your response,

            I agree aggregate coefficients should be saved in different fields and not in one. With current design and especially grade_category::set_properties() influenced me to reset values properly when aggregation is changed.

            I also looked at the patches and unfortunately none is fixing the problem in correct place (grade_category::set_properties()).

            I have opened another issue (as improvement), to handle all aggregation coefficients separately.

            For peer-review/integration:

            1. There are two commit in the fix
              • Fixing problem
              • Fixing coding-style
            Show
            Rajesh Taneja added a comment - Thanks Michael and Eric for your response, I agree aggregate coefficients should be saved in different fields and not in one. With current design and especially grade_category::set_properties() influenced me to reset values properly when aggregation is changed. I also looked at the patches and unfortunately none is fixing the problem in correct place (grade_category::set_properties()). I have opened another issue (as improvement), to handle all aggregation coefficients separately. For peer-review/integration: There are two commit in the fix Fixing problem Fixing coding-style
            Hide
            Dan Poltawski added a comment -

            To clarify for watchers (as it wasn't immediately apparent to me ) the new issue is MDL-43308 about changing the DB structure to handle this properly. (We would not normally backport these kind of changes in DB structure, so Raj's approach to just fix the UI for this makes sense in the short term for current branches).

            About the patch Raj:

            1/ I have a natural dislike to long chained if statements as they are often source of bugs. So thinking about a way to keep these kind compacted logic bits together and reduce the cyclomatic complexity of the function..

            • There are two methods is_aggregationcoef_used() and is_extracredit_used() which do this some logic as your if logic will now do.
            • You could change these methods/create new methods which they call, which keep this logic in one place
            • Then you could do something like if (is_aggregationcoef_used($param->aggregation)) { to simplyify things.
            • That little bit of logic could be unit tested.

            2/ I don't think the coding style fixes should be backported (FYI open policy issue about this MDL-43233)

            3/ You need a fix for 2.4 too I think.

            Show
            Dan Poltawski added a comment - To clarify for watchers (as it wasn't immediately apparent to me ) the new issue is MDL-43308 about changing the DB structure to handle this properly. (We would not normally backport these kind of changes in DB structure, so Raj's approach to just fix the UI for this makes sense in the short term for current branches). About the patch Raj: 1/ I have a natural dislike to long chained if statements as they are often source of bugs. So thinking about a way to keep these kind compacted logic bits together and reduce the cyclomatic complexity of the function.. There are two methods is_aggregationcoef_used() and is_extracredit_used() which do this some logic as your if logic will now do. You could change these methods/create new methods which they call, which keep this logic in one place Then you could do something like if (is_aggregationcoef_used($param->aggregation)) { to simplyify things. That little bit of logic could be unit tested. 2/ I don't think the coding style fixes should be backported (FYI open policy issue about this MDL-43233 ) 3/ You need a fix for 2.4 too I think.
            Hide
            Rajesh Taneja added a comment -

            Thanks for the review Dan and providing better alternative.

            I have modified master branch integrating your suggestions, will backport them after review.

            Show
            Rajesh Taneja added a comment - Thanks for the review Dan and providing better alternative. I have modified master branch integrating your suggestions, will backport them after review.
            Hide
            Dan Poltawski added a comment - - edited

            Hi Raj,

            Yay, that looks better to me (hope you agree?).

            1. I think the new names are good, but would be better as uses rather than use aggregation_uses_extracredit
            2. I think we can add unit tests for this new method

            cheers,
            dan

            Show
            Dan Poltawski added a comment - - edited Hi Raj, Yay, that looks better to me (hope you agree?). 1. I think the new names are good, but would be better as uses rather than use aggregation_uses_extracredit 2. I think we can add unit tests for this new method cheers, dan
            Hide
            Rajesh Taneja added a comment -

            Thanks Dan,

            Added unit test and changed name to use "uses"

            Pushing for integration.

            Show
            Rajesh Taneja added a comment - Thanks Dan, Added unit test and changed name to use "uses" Pushing for integration.
            Hide
            Sam Hemelryk added a comment -

            Hi Raj - your changes here look spot on, however you've got a typo within the commit messages (MDL--21180) could you please fix that up so that we can grep logs for this issue in the future.
            Once done I'll pull this in.

            Cheers
            Sam

            Show
            Sam Hemelryk added a comment - Hi Raj - your changes here look spot on, however you've got a typo within the commit messages (MDL--21180) could you please fix that up so that we can grep logs for this issue in the future. Once done I'll pull this in. Cheers Sam
            Hide
            Rajesh Taneja added a comment -

            Thanks Sam,

            Fixed commit message.

            Show
            Rajesh Taneja added a comment - Thanks Sam, Fixed commit message.
            Hide
            Sam Hemelryk added a comment -

            Thanks Raj - this has been integrated now.

            Show
            Sam Hemelryk added a comment - Thanks Raj - this has been integrated now.
            Hide
            Damyon Wiese added a comment -

            "Make sure children are not set extra credit". I think this means to fail the test if children are set to extra credit. They are set to extra credit when switching from "Weighted mean of grades" to "Simple weighted mean of grades" so I'm failing this test (tested on master).

            Show
            Damyon Wiese added a comment - "Make sure children are not set extra credit". I think this means to fail the test if children are set to extra credit. They are set to extra credit when switching from "Weighted mean of grades" to "Simple weighted mean of grades" so I'm failing this test (tested on master).
            Hide
            Rajesh Taneja added a comment -

            Thanks Damyon, the test was supposed to be run with default weigh values.

            I have updated testing instructions to reflect that.

            Show
            Rajesh Taneja added a comment - Thanks Damyon, the test was supposed to be run with default weigh values. I have updated testing instructions to reflect that.
            Hide
            Damyon Wiese added a comment -

            Testing again.

            Show
            Damyon Wiese added a comment - Testing again.
            Hide
            Damyon Wiese added a comment -

            Tested on all branches - the test instructions pass.

            Thanks Raj!

            Show
            Damyon Wiese added a comment - Tested on all branches - the test instructions pass. Thanks Raj!
            Hide
            Damyon Wiese added a comment -

            Twas the week before Christmas,
            And all though HQ
            Devs were scrambling to finish peer review.
            They sent all their issues,
            and rushed out the door -
            "To the beach!" someone heard them roar!

            This issue has been released upstream. Thanks!

            Show
            Damyon Wiese added a comment - Twas the week before Christmas, And all though HQ Devs were scrambling to finish peer review. They sent all their issues, and rushed out the door - "To the beach!" someone heard them roar! This issue has been released upstream. Thanks!

              People

              • Votes:
                19 Vote for this issue
                Watchers:
                21 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                • Created:
                  Updated:
                  Resolved:

                  Agile