As I said in my original post I don't think we need to be super strict and probably don't need to enforce anything (at least not yet). When I started the thread to establish guidelines I meant that...they would just be guidelines or a checklist that can be loosely followed as a template for people to help them out with filling out new Jiras. There's going to be reasons to deviate but it could be a good starting point.
My goal here is not to create a bunch of work on people or for it to be a big burden, just to help make sure Jiras have useful info. So maybe at first we just add a section to the committer page that just describes the kind of information a good Jira and good commit message should contain and go from there vs establishing anything formal or enforced. On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 11:20 AM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: > Is this a matter of just be careful and provide the information with > the format we have now... or we want to enforce and change to a > certain format within commit messages (like Netty does for instance)? > > On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 8:28 AM Christopher Shannon > <christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > JB, > > > > Right, simple things don’t need much detail. It’s pretty easy to just use > > some common sense and to tell when something is trivial and doesn’t need > a > > lot of detail vs a more complex issue that should have a lot more > written. > > Things like fixing a NPE, dependency updates, logging changes, etc don’t > > need much info at all and could just have a title and no description of > the > > title is self explanatory. > > > > But new features, most bug fixes, or major changes should have some > details > > written to help understand the issue. > > > > On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 1:40 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > > wrote: > > > > > If we distinguish the simple jira where the title is enough (I'm > > > thinking about the dependency updates where the title is enough, but > > > these Jiras are good for the tracking), I generally agree. > > > > > > +1 to have some guidelines in the contributor guide (in source repo > > > and/or website) and also in PR template on github. > > > > > > Regards > > > JB > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 9:25 PM Christopher Shannon > > > <christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > As I brought up in the Artemis 2.21.0 vote thread I have noticed a > > > pattern > > > > of Jiras that have almost no information in them which makes it very > > > > difficult to follow along with bug fixes and new features. This made > > > > reviewing the current release more difficult. Some issues are > trivial but > > > > most issues should have a good description to document the change. > > > > > > > > I am proposing that going forward we come up with a template/guide or > > > > checklist of some sort for Jiras for people to follow, kind of like > > > coding > > > > standards or a checklist for reviewing pull requests. > > > > > > > > It doesn't have to be super strict, but some guidelines might be > nice. > > > Off > > > > the top of my head here are a few things: > > > > > > > > New Features: > > > > 1) What's the motivation of the feature? Why is it needed? > > > > 2) A high level description on the plan to implement the feature > > > > 2) Maybe some details on how testing will be done > > > > > > > > Bug Fixes: > > > > 1) How was the issue discovered? > > > > 2) How to reproduce and what versions are affected? > > > > 3) whats the proposed fix? > > > > > > > > My main motivation here is Jiras but we could also have guidelines > for > > > > commit messages if we want too. > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > -- > Clebert Suconic >
