Select component when filing issue

[JesperIRL]

Added missing info about components when filing a JBS issue
Also clarified how to close a resolved issue through verification

---

Progress

• Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
• Change must not contain extraneous whitespace

Reviewers

• Iris Clark (@irisclark - Reviewer) ⚠️ Review applies to 2462620a

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/guide.git pull/169/head:pull/169
$ git checkout pull/169

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/169
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/guide.git pull/169/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 169

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 169

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/guide/pull/169.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back jwilhelm! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

[openjdk]

@JesperIRL This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

Select component when filing issue

Reviewed-by: iris

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been no new commits pushed to the master branch. If another commit should be pushed before you perform the /integrate command, your PR will be automatically rebased. If you prefer to avoid any potential automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 04: Full - Incremental (779ba8df)
• 03: Full - Incremental (566aa3d3)
• 02: Full - Incremental (2462620a)
• 01: Full - Incremental (3eb1340e)
• 00: Full (c5d64de0)

[aivanov-jdk]

I'm still confused as to what version of the suggestion you liked best.

Suggested change

	An issue in [Resolved]{.jbs-value} state needs to go through [verification](#verifying-an-issue) to end up as [Closed]{.jbs-value}. If you accidentally move an issue to the [Resolved]{.jbs-value} state for a resolution that should only be [Closed]{.jbs-value}, use the "Verify" option in the state transition menu and select verification [None]{.jbs-value}.
	An issue in the [Resolved]{.jbs-value} state needs to go through [verification](#verifying-an-issue) to end up as [Closed]{.jbs-value}. If you move an issue to [Resolved]{.jbs-value} when it should be [Closed]{.jbs-value}, use the "Verify" option in the state transition menu and select verification [None]{.jbs-value}.

I think my second suggestion was clearer. I reverted to “move” instead of “transition” to avoid confusion with “state transition menu”; although they're closely related, and perhaps using the same word is better.