I like the idea of making it a soft requirement. That way for chain reviews, one can still have some TODOs which are going to be resolved by a later patch.
On Wednesday, November 11, 2015, Jojy Varghese <j...@mesosphere.io> wrote: > If we are going to track these TODOs on JIRA, I hope we add these as > sub-tasks to the stories/epics and are not floating free. Which brings the > question - how are epic completion timelines effected by these. > > -Jojy > > > > On Nov 11, 2015, at 9:39 AM, Greg Mann <g...@mesosphere.io > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > +1 > > for adding TODO(MESOS-xxxx) to the style guide as a soft requirement. I > > don't think it should be strictly required, since sometimes creating a > JIRA > > ticket just doesn't make sense, but I do have the feeling that in *most* > > cases, our process would benefit from creating a JIRA at the moment a > TODO > > is created to help ensure that the work doesn't fall through the cracks. > > > > Cheers, > > Greg > > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Marco Massenzio <ma...@mesosphere.io > <javascript:;>> > > wrote: > > > >> -1 > >> for mandatory adding MESOS-xxxx to TODO. > >> > >> it makes it more cumbersome to add TODOs and, I fear, would discourage > >> people from adding those. > >> For example in a "chain", TODOs may be short-lived enough that adding a > >> Jira would only add noise. > >> > >> I'm not even sure that (optionally) adding the Jira to the TODO will add > >> much value (in fact, it may make our backlog even more "noisy" than it > >> currently is) but I am willing to experiment with this and see how it > goes. > >> > >> -- > >> *Marco Massenzio* > >> Distributed Systems Engineer > >> http://codetrips.com > >> > >> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Alex Rukletsov <a...@mesosphere.com > <javascript:;>> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> I think we should encourage people to follow this pattern, but not > making > >>> this obligatory. > >>> > >>> I may be wrong, but I feel that sometimes we use `TODO`s as food for > >>> thought, not for something that should or will necessarily be > implemented > >>> soon. A `TODO` may provide additional context to the implementation > from > >>> the perspective, how the code or related feature may evolve in the > >> future. > >>> However, that original vision may change over time, so it's not always > >>> reasonable to create a ticket. > >>> > >>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io > <javascript:;>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi Ben, > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 8:33 AM, Benjamin Mahler < > >>>> benjamin.mah...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Kapil would you mind clarifying what is being proposed here? Folks > >> are > >>>>> already free to include a reference to a ticket when writing a > >> comment > >>>> or a > >>>>> TODO, so is the suggestion here to require it for TODOs? Or to add a > >>>> syntax > >>>>> for this? If it's the latter, what does the syntax achieve? > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> The proposal is two fold: > >>>> > >>>> A. Make it mandatory to include a JIRA ticket number with the TODO. > >>>> > >>>> B. Add a syntax for this and for that we need some consensus. I > >> proposed > >>>> two options in the initial email: > >>>> 1. TODO(<REPORTER>:MESOS-XXX) > >>>> 2. TODO(MESOS-XXX) > >>>> > >>>> I personally prefer the second option, since the `REPORTER' is already > >>>> covered as part of the Jira ticket. > >>>> > >>>> Kapil > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 4:29 AM, Klaus Ma <klaus1982...@gmail.com > <javascript:;>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> +1, JIRA will include more discussion and we can close it when it > >> has > >>>>> been > >>>>>> improved. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ---- > >>>>>> Da (Klaus), Ma (马达) | PMP® | Advisory Software Engineer > >>>>>> Platform Symphony/DCOS Development & Support, STG, IBM GCG > >>>>>> +86-10-8245 4084 | klaus1982...@gmail.com <javascript:;> | > http://k82.me > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Alexander Rojas < > >>>>> alexan...@mesosphere.io <javascript:;>> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> +1 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> This also provides a way of removing TODO’s since they are > >>> traceable. > >>>>> If > >>>>>>> you look in the code, there are TODO’s which are no relevant > >>> anymore > >>>> or > >>>>>>> probably cannot be understood from their actual context. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 08 Nov 2015, at 05:50, Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io > <javascript:;>> > >>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Folks, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I wanted to bring up a style issue related to the TODO tag in > >>>>>> comments. I > >>>>>>>> have filed a Jira ticket ( > >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3850) > >>>>>>>> with the following description: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Currently, we have a TODO(<username-of-original-author>) tags > >> to > >>>> note > >>>>>>> stuff > >>>>>>>> has "should be"/"has to be" done in future. While this provides > >>> us > >>>>> with > >>>>>>>> some notion of accounting, it's not enough. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The author listed in the TODO comment should be considered the > >>>>>>> "Reporter", > >>>>>>>> but not necessarily the "Assignee". Further, since the stuff > >>>> "should > >>>>>>>> be"/"has to be" done, why not have a Jira issue tracking it? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We can use TODO(MESOS-XXX) or TODO(<Reporter>:MESOS-XXX) or > >>>> something > >>>>>>>> similar. Finally, we might wan to consider adding this to the > >>> style > >>>>>> guide > >>>>>>>> to make it a soft/hard requirement. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Are there any opinions/suggestions on this one? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>> Kapil > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >
