Eric Lemings wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 3:55 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [jira] Deleted: (STDCXX-33) Implement C++0x
regular expressions
Eric Lemings wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 3:22 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [jira] Deleted: (STDCXX-33) Implement C++0x
regular expressions
Eric Lemings wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Lemings
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 2:58 PM
To: '[email protected]'
Subject: RE: [jira] Deleted: (STDCXX-33) Implement C++0x
regular expressions
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 2:30 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [jira] Deleted: (STDCXX-33) Implement C++0x
regular expressions
Martin Sebor wrote:
Could we move issues instead of deleting them?
Also, we're still discussing what the plan is WRT how these
components will be organized so these kinds of changes seem
premature. In fact, I'm not sure I see why any issues need
to be deleted or moved. Why can't the existing ones can be
changed?
They are subtasks and subtasks can't be moved. I tried.
Also, subtasks can't be broken down into smaller issues. Some of
these issues will likely need to be subdivided into smaller chunks
of work.
As a courtesy to the rest of us working on the project it would
be nice to let us know what restructuring changes you'd like to
make, and wait for feedback before making them. Especially
deleting issues should be brought up because doing so not only
permanently removes them from the database but also breaks any
links pointing to such issues.
Jira is pretty smart. It allows you to relink such issues before
deleting issues so there are no broken links.
This is now a broken link:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-33
And the issues are still in the database. I just moved them from
subtasks into individual issues. Or you'd prefer to keep the
duplicate issues?
I would prefer us to have a plan before we start moving issues
around or permanently deleting them.
As it is, the rest of us are left to guess what's happening
with the existing issues, why they're being deleted, why new
ones are being created, or where you plan to stop. If you want
to change/improve things you need to let us in on your plan
ahead of time to make sure your changes don't adversely affect
anyone or that there isn't a better way to go about implementing
them. It's possible that we'd end up doing exactly what you did
in the end. The big difference is that we'd all understand and
(hopefully) agree with what's going on.
Initiative...momentum got the better of me I suppose. :) Sorry.
So what is it, in particular, that we all do NOT understand or agree
with? I'll clarify if I can... or haven't already.
I thought I already said that I don't agree with deleting
issues or making these types of structural changes w/o having
a plan in place. What is your plan? What if someone else has
a different plan?
We discussed integrating the Jira TR1 components into the
others (deleting issues wasn't mentioned). You proposed adding
"(C++ 0x)" to the subject and I suggested adding a field for
the version of the standard instead. We haven't finished the
discussion yet but you've already created a number of new
issues that don't follow either of the two proposed
conventions. There's no "(C++ 0x)" in the Summary and no new
field indicating the version of the standard, and links to
the deleted issues are now irreparably dead.
Martin
