On 6 March 2013 08:15, Branko Čibej <[email protected]> wrote: > On 06.03.2013 08:57, Greg Stein wrote: > > Hey all, > > > > I've noticed, for a while, that bloodhound-dev is filled with more > > ticket activity than commit activity. This doesn't seem right. > > > > Using tickets to plan changes is more of a Review-Than-Commit > > approach, and is definitely slower for development. This project was > > set up as Commit-Then-Review, but I think it has fallen into a "let's > > use our BH install and file tickets for everything" mode. As a result, > > development appears to be *much* slower than it should otherwise be. > > > > When filing a ticket, I would encourage everybody to stop and > > reconsider. If you can perform a commit, then do that instead. Others > > can review the commit, rather than the ticket. > > >
As for the below: > > If you are working on some code, and are skipping some work, then just > > drop in a comment about the future-needed work. In the Subversion > > project, we've found that marking these comments with ### makes them > > easy to spot/find (no code/prose looks like that, so they stand out). > > By placing these "to-do" markers into the code while you're working > > there, and committing, it means you don't have to change contexts to > > go and file a future work ticket. > There's a caveat to this in our case: We can't browse the repository from Bloodhound itself. The ticket for this has been open since last July, a solution had been agreed 6 months ago: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5064 I did chase this up recently without success. - Joe > > > > If you want to discuss something, then consider just placing it onto > > the dev@ list. Most people want to interact on the *list* ... not > > through comments on tickets. By filing a ticket, for something > > intended for discussion, then you're actually working against > > yourself. The broadest (and easiest) discussion forum is here on dev@. > > > > I would recommend filing tickets *only* for bugs. > > > > Please... let's get back to Commit-Then-Review. More commits. Less > tickets. > > We've had this discussion before, and for a short time the situation was > better. ... but apparently not for long. > > I absolutely agree with Greg. There's something wrong with the fact that > there are several hundred tickets open, many of them seem to be > "implementation instructions" for designs in the wiki -- which clearly > should've resulted in code, not more tickets. :) > > -- Brane > > -- > Branko Čibej > Director of Subversion | WANdisco | www.wandisco.com > > -- Joe Dreimann UX Designer | WANdisco <http://www.wandisco.com/>
