Lars Kühne wrote, On 11/17/2005 10:18 PM:
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Lars Kühne wrote, On 11/17/2005 3:19 PM:
On 11/17/05, *Dain Sundstrom* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
+1 Using JIRA for tracking progress of the ORB would be great.
[...] I suggest you create an "Add an
ORB implementation" issue that can be the parent of all the tasks.
Done, GERONIMO-1198
I think that we should make focused jira issues rather than a single
umbrella issue that tracks all work on the CORBA server. Ideally,
people would put their stake in the ground by writing about the
architectural bit that they are going to implement in the wiki. Then
follow up with a a single Jira issue that basically marks the bit
that you are going to implement. File sub-tasks for the patches
that you are submitting.
WDYT?
Alan,
as Dain suggested this issue is meant to serve as a parent issue for
individual subtasks (or rather "incorporates" links?). This, together
with using the CORBA component, is meant to serve as a simple method
for filtering for individual work items that are open. Inidividual
sub-issues would be stuff like "implement
ORB.resolve_initial_reference", "allow JMX monitoring of property
xyz", "add unit tests for ValueType mashalling" or "document
configuration properties".
The problem is that keeping track of the patches, and they will be more
than one for any issue, becomes a problem because they are tossed in one
bucket of attachments. I do not believe that there is a need to capture
the hierarchy of the architecture in Jira. A flat list of Jira issues
with sub-tasks that track individual patches for that issue should be fine..
I have never used a Wiki as a collaboration tool, so maybe I don't
know what I'm missing. Right now I wouldn't know what to write about
the above sub-issues, as most of it isn't really "architectural" -
it's described in the CORBA spec and somebody just has to do it.
That's ok. There's no point in excessive bureucracy, I would just file
a Jira issue in this case. However, the reason that I wanted to use the
wiki was to use that as an informal organization mechanism. I would
hate for you and others to start working on the same thing at the same time.
For the trickier parts of an ORB a Wiki would certainly be a good idea
to achieve some high level implementation idea before actual coding
starts. However, I typically write an implementation overview
(responsibility of each package and how they work together) in javadoc
overview and package docs.
Do you use javadoc in geronimo land or do you write everything in the
Wiki? What about end user docs, would they belong in src/xdocs, so
they are easy to distribute with releases, or would that go into the
Wiki, so they are easier to edit for non-committers?
We haven't discussed that at any length, iirc. I personally would
prefer everything to go into the wiki.
Regards,
Alan
