On 8/23/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
almost all ;)
wendy pointed out more detailed, what I was thinking about :)
On 8/23/06, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, but that's a far cry from Matze's "for all commits". For all major
> enhancements, I'm absolutely d'accord.
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
> On 8/23/06, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 8/22/06, Martin Marinschek < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I really don't see the necessity for MyFaces committers to do all
> > > extensions of MyFaces through jira, if sufficient communication has
> > > happened on the developer list first.
> > >
> > > Why do you think that opening a jira-issue and adding patches will
> > > make us more efficient in the development process?
> >
> > Patches from committers don't need to go through JIRA, but IMO there
> > ought to be an issue corresponding to every major change in
> > functionality or addition.
> >
> > Commit messages that clearly explain what is being added or changed,
> > and that refer to a JIRA issue, make life much easier when trying to
> > track down problems, construct release notes, or just learn about the
> > codebase.
> >
> > --
> > Wendy
> >
>
>
> --
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
