--- "Jean T. Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jean T. Anderson wrote: > > Andrew McIntyre wrote: > > > >> You could either 1) post the patch and sample > output together as a zip > >> or jar file to jira, or 2) post the patch and > sample output together > >> to derby-dev instead of Jira. Or, 3) post both as > separate attachments > >> to jira as you describe. I don't think anyone > will mind one extra > >> mail, as long as its the changes are easy to > review. But, if you post > >> the patch and sample output together in a single > mail to derby-dev, > >> then there's only one mail to review. :-) > >> > > > > I prefer 1 or 3 for the following reasons: > > > > - It keeps the patch tightly coupled to the Jira > issue > > - If the patch isn't quite right, a new one can be > uploaded and the old > > one removed. One problem with posting patches to > derby-dev is it can be > > difficult to know if you've seen all the patches > for a thread and have > > the "right" one. > > One more reason for 1 or 3: > > - Uploads the file(s) to just one place and avoids > emailing the patch to > everyone on the derby-dev list, which is currently > at 220 subscribers > according to > http://people.apache.org/~coar/mlists.html . Anyone > interested in the patch can readily download it from > Jira. > > I don't mind an additional Jira notification for > option 3. Email filters > can easily organize list traffic. > > Keeping it in Jira provides a single review spot. > And if the reviewer > also posts the verdict to Jira, then it really does > keep it to one spot. > > -jean
The problem is that some fixes affect multiple doc files. Posting the patch and then having to post a bunch of html files is not efficient, both for the poster and the derby dev list. It would work if we can post zip files to JIRA, but I had been working under the assumption that that was not the case. If it is, then would we want 1)one zip file with the patch and the html output, or 2)do we want two attachments, one being the patch and one the zip of the output? I personally think 1) is the best option because in 2)if the reviewer or anyone else has further changes for the issue or wants more changes to the patch, then we have to create a new patch and output, post two more files, and delete two old attachments. This can get messy, and mistakes might occur. I think a zip of all relevant files (patch plus html) for each submission would work best. Once again, I am assuming I was wrong about submitting zip files to JIRA, as Andrew hinted at. Thoughts?
