Well, having a look at JIRA made it clear to me now. +1 from my side even if the release list will explode ;)
Lars Am Dienstag 07 Oktober 2008 09:33:23 schrieb Guillaume Nodet: > Components are still servicemix-http, servicemix-jms, etc... but in > addition to 3.2.x and 3.3 and other servicemix releases, we now have > servicemix-http-2008.01, etc... > So it will raise the number of releases, not the number of components. > The problem with splitting the components in their own JIRA project is > that building the release notes for a smx 3.3 release will be much > more difficult, as you'd have to manually concatenate all the JIRA > issues from components. > > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Lars Heinemann > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Guillaume, > > > > normally I would prefer having products for the components but that would > > maybe cause a huge amount of work for administration. > > The problem with your suggestion is (correct me if I am wrong with it) > > that the list of available components will grow with each component > > release. That will be fine right now but looking into future will bring > > up some hundreds of components to choose from when filing a JIRA issue. > > > > If haven't got a better idea though. > > > > Lars > > > > Am Dienstag 07 Oktober 2008 08:57:29 schrieb Guillaume Nodet: > >> We've never discussed the use of JIRA for components wrt to the new > >> versioning scheme of these components. > >> So what I propose is: > >> * create JIRA release entries for each components > >> (servicemix-http-2008.01, etc...) > >> * for existing JIRA issues, make sure the right component is used > >> * for all issues, assign the next release for this component > >> (servicemix-http-2008.01) > >> * when we release smx3 / smx4, we'll have to choose the components > >> version to include. At that point, we will assign all the JIRA issues > >> to 3.3 in addition to their components version for example > >> > >> This means a given issue will have several released version assigned: > >> servicemix-http-2008.01, 3.3, 4.0, etc... Which is btw already the > >> case when we backport to the 3.2 branch. > >> Thoughts ?
