On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Florian MOGA <moga....@gmail.com> wrote: > What about a Samples category as well? > > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Florian MOGA <moga....@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Brent, >> The idea for the User folder is that it would help us avoid issues being >> assigned to the wrong category (might not be the case for such general >> categories) but most important user reported issues will go through a triage >> phase and become "official" issues after we take a look at them. It will >> also be a measure for us to monitor how much user activity we have and the >> common problems they are facing. >> The Ideas section would be destined for things like "How about having an >> implementation.jpa?". Google Summer of Code project ideas would fit in too. >> As a high level view it would contain ideas that also need some research or >> it is not sure that something like that is possible. It would basically be a >> place where to store the ideas you have and don't have time to expoit in >> order not to forget them. At some point I saw a page on the tuscany website >> trying to do this but I can't find it at the moment... >> The main idea is that user issues might be so many that they would make >> the list verbose and the ideas issues would be such a small number that it >> will be hard to find them. I don't know exactly but I'm expecting that from >> the current opened issues a big part are user reported issues which most of >> them are out dated, not affecting them or we don't have any clue about them >> anymore. >> Does this make sense? >> Florian >> >> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Brent Daniel <brenthdan...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> +1 on the shortened list of JIRA categories. The current granularity >>> doesn't seem to be all that helpful. I'm not sure if there needs to be >>> a separate section for user questions -- with the shortened list it >>> should be possible for even the newest of users to find a home for a >>> JIRA. Similarly for "Ideas", it seems like most issues would fit into >>> one of the other categories. Are there current examples of JIRAs that >>> would fit best in a separate "Ideas" section? >>> >>> Brent >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 4:48 AM, Florian MOGA <moga....@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > Since we're cleaning up things I took a look again at the JIRA >>> > Categories. I >>> > propose simply having: >>> > Java SCA >>> > Java SDO >>> > Java DAS >>> > C++ SCA >>> > C++ SDO >>> > C++ DAS >>> > OASIS >>> > Tools (including Hudson, Maven, SVN issues) >>> > Website/Documentation >>> > User Questions >>> > Ideas >>> > >>> > instead of having ~30 categories which nobody uses... It seems simpler >>> > and >>> > gives us the functionality we need out of it. >>> > Regarding the User Questions section we can let users report issues in >>> > there >>> > and only after an investigation from our side we can "promote" them to >>> > the >>> > appropriate category. Seems fair enough... >>> > SDO and DAS sections seem to have some a considerable number of issues >>> > opened (~20%). How can we clean those up? >>> > >>> > On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Luciano Resende <luckbr1...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> >> >>> >> On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 4:36 AM, Simon Laws >>> >> <simonsl...@googlemail.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > Current status >>> >> > 1500 closed >>> >> > 1560 resolved >>> >> > 500 Open (365 SCA) >>> >> > >>> >> > Each person, for those that you've opened >>> >> > Close resolved ones >>> >> > Close open JIRA that no longer apply >>> >> > Can do this without sending email although the check box seems to >>> >> > have been removed >>> >> > >>> >> >>> >> I'm not seeing the option to "transition jiras" without sending >>> >> e-mails, do I need to be admin to do that ? otherwise I don't think we >>> >> want 200 more e-mails just to move from fixed to close :) >>> >> >>> >> > For JIRA that fall out of this process >>> >> > Take it to the list >>> >> > Mail back to the user? >>> >> > We can try and group correctly - Feature request vs Bug >>> >> > Use "will not fix" if we really think we're not going to do >>> >> > anything >>> >> > >>> >> > Categories >>> >> > general dissatisfaction with JIRA categories we have as they are >>> >> > not really used >>> >> > Try to convert to a shorter list (should try and match >>> >> > distribution structure?) >>> >> > base runtime >>> >> > binding.ws >>> >> > binding.jms >>> >> > etc for the main extensions >>> >> > Look at this list when we've talked about release artifacts >>> >> > Encourage people to use unknown rather than guessing >>> >> > SCA Java is default so would need SCA Native, SDO Java etc >>> >> > >>> >> >>> >> There are several uncategorized ones, should we handle those as well ? >>> >> >>> >> -- >>> >> Luciano Resende >>> >> http://people.apache.org/~lresende >>> >> http://twitter.com/lresende1975 >>> >> http://lresende.blogspot.com/ >>> > >>> > >> > >
I'd like to maintain the two OASIS categories as it distinguishes between those issues Tuscany has to do something about and those issues that OASIS have to do something about. Other than that I'm +1 on reducing the granularity. Simon -- Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
